report geotechnical design report · and the 50% detailed design drawings, dated 15 november 2019...
TRANSCRIPT
REPORT
Geotechnical Design Report Highway 93/95 Improvements, near Radium Hot Springs, BC
Submitted to:
BC Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure Attn: David Tracz, PEng
4th Floor, 310 Ward Street
Nelson, BC
V1L 5S4 Canada
Submitted by:
Golder Associates Ltd.
590 McKay Avenue, Suite 300
Kelowna, British Columbia,
V1Y 5A8 Canada
+1 250 860 8424
19115216-007-R-Rev0
2 March 2020
2 March 2020 19115216-007-R-Rev0
ii
Table of Contents
1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................. 1
2.0 PROJECT UNDERSTANDING ....................................................................................................................... 1
3.0 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION ............................................................................................................... 2
3.1 Desktop Study ...................................................................................................................................... 2
4.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ........................................................................................................................ 2
4.1 Summary of Subsurface Conditions .................................................................................................... 2
4.1.1 Edgewater South............................................................................................................................. 2
4.1.2 Edgewater North ............................................................................................................................. 3
4.1.3 Harrogate ........................................................................................................................................ 3
4.2 Groundwater......................................................................................................................................... 4
4.3 Laboratory Testing ............................................................................................................................... 4
5.0 SEISMIC ANALYSIS ....................................................................................................................................... 4
6.0 SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS ..................................................................................................................... 5
6.1 Edgewater South Embankment ........................................................................................................... 6
6.2 Edgewater North Embankment ............................................................................................................ 6
6.3 Harrogate Cut Slope ............................................................................................................................ 7
7.0 COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS .................................................................................................... 8
7.1 General ................................................................................................................................................. 8
7.2 Site Suitability ....................................................................................................................................... 8
7.3 Site Preparation ................................................................................................................................... 8
7.3.1 Stripping and Sub-Excavation ......................................................................................................... 8
7.4 Frost Susceptibility and Protection Depth ............................................................................................ 9
7.5 Fill ......................................................................................................................................................... 9
7.5.1 Embankment Fill ............................................................................................................................. 9
7.5.1.1 Fill Beneath Structures ................................................................................................................. 9
7.5.2 Landscape Fill ................................................................................................................................. 9
2 March 2020 19115216-007-R-Rev0
iii
7.6 Temporary Cut Slopes and/or Shoring .............................................................................................. 10
7.7 Permanent Cut and Fill Slopes .......................................................................................................... 10
7.7.1 Edgewater South........................................................................................................................... 10
7.7.2 Edgewater North ........................................................................................................................... 11
7.7.3 Harrogate Cut Slope ..................................................................................................................... 11
7.7.3.1 Harrogate Wet Area ................................................................................................................... 11
7.8 Construction Dewatering .................................................................................................................... 12
7.9 Pavement Design ............................................................................................................................... 12
7.9.1 Existing Pavement Structure ......................................................................................................... 12
7.9.2 Traffic Data Analysis ..................................................................................................................... 13
7.9.3 Comments on Existing Pavement ................................................................................................. 14
7.9.3.1 Edgewater South ....................................................................................................................... 14
7.9.3.2 Edgewater North ........................................................................................................................ 14
7.9.3.3 Harrogate ................................................................................................................................... 14
7.9.4 New Pavement Construction ........................................................................................................ 15
7.9.4.1 Edgewater South ....................................................................................................................... 15
7.9.4.2 Edgewater North ........................................................................................................................ 15
7.9.4.3 Harrogate ................................................................................................................................... 16
7.10 Geotechnical Field Review and Materials Testing ............................................................................. 16
8.0 CLOSURE ..................................................................................................................................................... 17
9.0 REFERENCES .............................................................................................................................................. 18
TABLES
Table 1: Highway 93/95 Improvement Details .......................................................................................................... 1
Table 2: Horizontal Spectral Response Acceleration Values for Edgewater (Site Class C) ................................... 4
Table 3: Horizontal Spectral Response Acceleration Values for Harrogate (Site Class C) ..................................... 5
Table 4: Summary of F values for Site Class D Conditions ..................................................................................... 5
Table 5: Analysis Results – Edgewater South ......................................................................................................... 6
Table 6: Analysis Results – Edgewater North .......................................................................................................... 7
Table 7: Analysis Results - Harrogate ...................................................................................................................... 7
2 March 2020 19115216-007-R-Rev0
iv
Table 8: Current Pavement Design ........................................................................................................................ 12
Table 9: Diverted AADT/ESALs Traffic Estimate ................................................................................................... 13
Table 10: Estimated AADT during 2020 and 2021 ................................................................................................. 13
Table 11: Truck Factors .......................................................................................................................................... 13
FIGURES
Figure 1A: Test Hole Locations - Edgewater South
Figure 1B: Test Hole Locations - Edgewater North
Figure 1C: Test Hole Locations - Harrogate
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A Important Information and Limitations of this Report
APPENDIX B Geotechnical Data Report
APPENDIX C 2015 NBCC Seismic Hazard Calculation Reports
APPENDIX D Graphical Results of Slope Stability Analyses
2 March 2020 19115216-007-R-Rev0
1
1.0 INTRODUCTION
As requested by the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure (MoTI), Golder Associates Ltd. (Golder) has
carried out a geotechnical investigation for the proposed improvements to Highway 93/95 between Golden and
Radium Hot Springs (Radium), BC. The purpose of the geotechnical investigation was to assess the soil and
groundwater conditions at three proposed sites (Edgewater South, Edgewater North and Harrogate), and based
on the results of the investigation, provide comments and recommendations pertaining to geotechnical aspects of
the proposed highway improvements at each site.
The geotechnical investigation was carried out in accordance with the scope of work presented in our proposal,
dated 8 October 2019 (Golder Reference 19115216-001-TM-Rev1-4000), with one exception, the proposed scope
of work for Spillmacheen was not carried out as part of this geotechnical investigation, as requested by MoTI
following issue of the proposal.
It should be noted that this scope of work is limited to the geotechnical investigation outlined in the proposal and
does not include any investigations, analytical testing or assessments for possible soil and groundwater
contamination, archaeological or biological considerations or erosion and/or sediment control measures.
This report should be read in conjunction with the “Important Information and Limitations of this Report” provided
in Appendix A. We specifically direct the reader’s attention to this information, as it is essential for the proper use
and interpretation of this report.
2.0 PROJECT UNDERSTANDING
MoTI provided Golder with the Conceptual Design Report and Drawings, dated September and October 2019,
and the 50% Detailed Design Drawings, dated 15 November 2019 (MoTI Project No. 25042-0000, Rev PD).
Based on these reports and drawings, Golder understands that traffic will be temporarily detoured along Highway
95/93 during planned improvements to the Trans-Canada Highway (HWY 1) between Golden and the Alberta
border. With this temporary increase in traffic, three sites along Highway 93/95 have been identified as priorities
for safety and capacity upgrades.
The proposed improvements to these sites have been summarised in Table 1 below.
Table 1: Highway 93/95 Improvement Details
Site Distance South
of Golden (km)
Existing Infrastructure Proposed Development
Edgewater
South
94 Existing intersection with Columbia Road
(Riverview Road), south of Edgewater
Improve the intersection and
turning lanes
Edgewater
North
92 Existing intersection with Columbia Road,
north of Edgewater
Improve the intersection and
turning lanes
Harrogate 52 Historic borrow area located northeast of
the highway used as an unpaved pull-out
area
Develop a commercial vehicle
inspection facility near the
existing pull-out including
improved turning lanes
2 March 2020 19115216-007-R-Rev0
2
3.0 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
The results of Golder’s geotechnical investigation are presented in our 13 January 2020 Geotechnical Data
Report titled “Geotechnical Data Report Highway 95 Improvements, Radium Hot Springs, BC” (Rev#: 19115216-
400-006-R-Rev0). This report is presented in Appendix B. The following section presents a summary of the
investigation program intended to aid the readers in interpreting the comments and recommendations presented
in Section 7.0 of this report.
3.1 Desktop Study
Prior to undertaking the investigation program, Golder reviewed available technical literature pertaining to the
general site conditions and depositional environment of the sites. The sites span an approximately 42 Km section
of highway 93/95 which runs north-south adjacent to the anastomosing upper Columbia River along the east side
of the Columbia Valley region of the Rocky Mountain Trench which separates the Columbia Mountains (west)
from the Rocky Mountains (east). The Columbia Valley was primarily formed by geological faulting, however, has
also been considerably shaped by each Pleistocene glaciation.1
Based on this geomorphological environment Golder anticipates that the subsurface stratigraphy primarily
comprises layers of glacial, glaciofluvial and glaciolacustrine deposits overlain by high and low energy alluvial
deposits. Due to the proximity of the highway to the base of the Rocky Mountains, isolated coarse grain colluvial
deposits may be encountered.
4.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
The drilling program was completed under the full time supervision of a member of Golder’s geotechnical team
who identified the drilling locations in the field, logged the subsurface soil conditions and collected representative
samples for laboratory testing.
Detailed descriptions of the investigation program and subsurface soil conditions encountered can be found in the
Geotechnical Data Report presented in Appendix B. A condensed summary of the subsurface conditions at each
site are presented below.
4.1 Summary of Subsurface Conditions
4.1.1 Edgewater South
Asphalt Thickness: Highway 93/95 shoulder to 0.18 mbgs. Columbia Road/Riverside Road to 0.08 mbgs.
Fill: Generally, inferred density to compact, dry, dark brown SILTY SAND and GRAVEL. Fill material was
encountered below asphalt to a maximum depth of between approximately 0.8-1.3 mbgs.
1 Clague, J (1975). Late Quaternary Sediments and Geomorphic History of the Southern Rocky Mountain Trench, British Columbia. Department of Geological Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver British Columbia Canada V6T 1W5. Canadian Journal of Earth Science, 12, 595-605.
2 March 2020 19115216-007-R-Rev0
3
Native Soils: Generally, light brown to greyish brown, SILTY CLAY to SILT. Based on SPT results, the
consistency of the soil ranges from soft to very stiff, generally becoming stiffer with depth. The moisture
content ranges from below to equal to the plastic limit. A layer of brown, stiff gravelly CLAYEY SILT was also
encountered in AH19-04 between 1.2 mbgs and 2.9 mbgs.
4.1.2 Edgewater North
Asphalt Thickness: Highway 95/Columbia Road intersection to 0.25 mbgs. Highway 93/95 shoulder to
0.08 mbgs.
Fill: Generally, inferred density of compact, dry and ranges from dark brown gravelly SILTY SAND to SILTY
SAND and GRAVEL. Fill material was encountered below asphalt to a maximum depth of approximately
0.9 mbgs.
Native Soils: The native soil encountered at Edgewater North was variable and generally comprised the
following units:
▪ Brown, moist, gravelly SILTY SAND to sandy SILTY GRAVEL was encountered from 0.9 mbgs to
1.4 mbgs. The density of this soil was inferred as compact.
▪ Light brown, cohesive, gravelly/sandy CLAYEY SILT and SILTY CLAY was encountered from 1.4 mbgs
to maximum depth of 5.2 mbgs. The consistency of this soil was inferred to be soft to very stiff, with a
moisture content ranging between less than and equal to the plastic limit.
▪ Brown to grey brown, dry to moist SAND and GRAVEL was encountered from 4.4 mbgs to termination
depth of 5.2 mbgs in AH19-06. The density of this soil was inferred to be dense.
4.1.3 Harrogate
Asphalt Thickness: Highway 93/95 and Ben Hynes Loop Road intersection to 0.18 mbgs. Highway 93/95
shoulder to 0.08 mbgs.
Fill: Generally, inferred compact to dense, dry and ranges from dark brown to brown, gravelly SILTY SAND
to SILTY SAND and GRAVEL. Fill material was encountered to a maximum depth of 0.9 mbgs along the
shoulder of Highway 95, to 2.7 mbgs at the Highway 95/Ben Hynes Loop Road intersection, and within the
existing gravel pull-out, approximately 0.6 metres.
Native Soils: The native soils encountered at Harrogate was relatively consistent across the site and
generally comprised the following units:
▪ Brown to grey brown, compact to very dense, gravelly SILTY SAND to SAND and GRAVEL ranging
between 1.1 mbgs and 5.2 mbgs. Moisture content ranged from dry to wet. Cobbles and boulders were
also noted in some boreholes; overlying
▪ Light brown to grey, firm to very stiff CLAYEY SILT to SILTY CLAY, as identified in AH19-08, AH19-10
and AH19-13, between 4.4 mbgs to maximum termination depth of 6.7 mbgs. Moisture content was
equal to or greater than the plastic limit.
2 March 2020 19115216-007-R-Rev0
4
▪ In the most southern boreholes (AH19-07 and AH19-08), brown to light brown, very stiff, CLAYEY SILT
was noted below fill material between 0.9 mbgs and 3.2 mbgs. The moisture content was equal to the
plastic limit.
4.2 Groundwater
Groundwater was encountered at Harrogate in AH19-10, AH19-11 and AH19-13 between 2.9 mbgs and 4.8
mbgs. Groundwater was not encountered at Edgewater North or Edgewater South.
4.3 Laboratory Testing
All soil testing was conducted at Golder’s material testing laboratory in Burnaby, BC. The following testing was
completed:
Water Content Determination (ASTM D2216) – 18 tests
Particle Size Distribution (ASTM D6913) – 8 tests
Atterberg Limits (ASTM D4318) – 10 tests
Laboratory Hand Vane Test (ASTM D4648/D4648M-16) – 1 test
5.0 SEISMIC ANALYSIS
The Canadian Highway Bridge Design Code (CHBDC), S6-14 divides sites into six classes (A to F) for evaluation
of seismic site response. The classification is based on the average shear wave velocity, standard penetration
resistance (‘N’ value) or soil undrained shear strength over the top 30 metres of the soil profile. Based in the
results of the geotechnical investigation, and our understanding of the soil conditions that are characteristic of the
geological and depositional environment in the area, we consider that the Site Class D is an appropriate
classification for Edgewater South, Edgewater North and Harrogate sites.
Site specific seismic hazard predictions for each site were obtained from the Natural Resources Canada website
using the National Building Code of Canada (NBCC) 2015 Hazard Calculator and are presented in Appendix C.
The predicted peak ground acceleration, peak ground velocity and spectral accelerations for the 1 in 2475, 1 in
975 and 1 in 475-year return period earthquake (2%, 5% and 10% probability of exceedance in a 50-year return
period) are presented in Table 2 and Table 3 below. The values in Table 2 and Table 3 are for “firm ground”
(NBCC - Site Class C).
Table 2: Horizontal Spectral Response Acceleration Values for Edgewater (Site Class C)
Return
Period
PGA PGV Sa (0.2) Sa (0.5) Sa (1.0) Sa (2.0) Sa (10.0)
1 in 2475 0.12g 0.097m/s 0.26g 0.17g 0.095g 0.046g 0.0060g
1 in 975 0.069g 0.060m/s 0.15g 0.10g 0.059g 0.030g 0.0040g
1 in 475 0.041g 0.040m/s 0.093g 0.065g 0.039g 0.021g 0.0030g
2 March 2020 19115216-007-R-Rev0
5
Table 3: Horizontal Spectral Response Acceleration Values for Harrogate (Site Class C)
Return
Period
PGA PGV Sa (0.2) Sa (0.5) Sa (1.0) Sa (2.0) Sa (10.0)
1 in 2475 0.12g 0.097m/s 0.26g 0.17g 0.095g 0.046g 0.0060g
1 in 975 0.069g 0.060m/s 0.154g 0.104g 0.058g 0.030g 0.004g
1 in 475 0.041g 0.039m/s 0.094g 0.065g 0.038g 0.020g 0.003g
Site coefficients taken from CHBDC S6-14, Section 4.4.3.3 – Site coefficients are provided in Table 4, such that
the Site Class C spectral accelerations in Table 2 and Table 3 can be factored to Site Class D ground conditions.
Table 4: Summary of F values for Site Class D Conditions
PGAref F (PGA) F (0.2) F (0.5) F (1.0) F (2.0) F (10.0)
0.120g 1.25 1.21 1.43 1.52 1.54 1.47
0.069g 1.29 1.24 1.47 1.55 1.57 1.49
0.041g 1.29 1.24 1.47 1.55 1.57 1.49
6.0 SLOPE STABILITY ANALYSIS
Based on our review of the 50% Detailed Design Drawings, Golder understands that slope re-grading may be
necessary north of the proposed Harrogate inspection site, at the intersection of Columbia Road South and
Highway 95 (Edgewater South). In order to assess suitable slope angles for the proposed cut and fill slopes
Golder carried out a series of global slope stability analyses on representative sections of the embankments
taking into consideration various cut slope angles. The approximate alignment of the sections used in the
analyses are presented in Figures 1A, 1B and 1C.
Golder analysed the static and pseudo-static behaviour of various cut slope angles using the Slope/W software
(Version 10.2) developed by GeoStudio International Ltd. The Morgenstern-Price method was applied to all
models. The basis for the models is described as follows:
Model dimensions were derived from the topographic information available on the 50% Design Drawings
(MoTI Project No. 25042-0000, Rev PD) as well as measurements taken by Golder during field
reconnaissance.
The delineation of subsurface stratigraphy in the models was assigned based on the subsurface stratigraphy
recorded in nearby boreholes as well as Golder’s review of surficial soil conditions on the existing cut slopes.
Material properties for the observed fill and native embankment soils were assigned based on typical values
commonly used in geotechnical engineering practice, considering the site observations and soil descriptions
contained within borehole logs and from index testing completed on representative soil samples.
2 March 2020 19115216-007-R-Rev0
6
No laboratory testing to define the strength properties of the soil has been undertaken by Golder, all material
input parameters used in this analysis are assumptions based on relevant published technical literature and
engineering judgement.
The horizontal seismic coefficients used for the pseudo-static slope stability analyses at each site were
determined by selecting the relevant return period for the road category as per the MoTI Bridge Standards
and Procedures Manual Volume 1 Supplement to CHBDC S6-14 (MoTI supplement to CHBDC S6-
14), Section 4.4.6.4. , adjusting the relevant PGA for each location to the site class (Site Class D) and using
two-thirds of this as the horizontal component of the PGA.
6.1 Edgewater South Embankment
A cross section of the proposed embankment widening located immediately south of the intersection of Columbia
Road South and Highway 95 was considered for analysis. Table 5 presents the calculated factor of safety (FOS)
for embankment orientations considered. Graphical results of each analysis are presented in Appendix D1.
For an estimate of shear strength of the SILTY CLAY, a Laboratory Hand Vane Test (ASTM D4648/D4648M-16)
was conducted in our Kelowna laboratory on an undisturbed tube sample of SILTY CLAY obtained during the field
investigation from 1.57 mbgs in AH19-01. The vane test yielded an undrained peak shear strength of 59.8 kPa
and a remoulded shear strength of 14.4 kPa. For the purposes of the slope stability model, a cohesion of 28 kPa
was used for the re-used silty clay fill and a cohesion of 59 kPa was used for the native, undisturbed silty clay.
Groundwater was not encountered during the drilling. A piezometric surface at the base of AH19-01 was assumed
for modelling purposes.
The Edgewater South Embankment was classified as a “Major-Route” (MoTI supplement to CHBDC
S6-14, Section 4.4.6.4.) and therefore the horizontal seismic coefficient used for the pseudo-static analysis was
0.059, which is two-thirds of the PGA for the 1 in 975 return period factored for Site Class D ground conditions.
Table 5: Analysis Results – Edgewater South
Slope Angle Cross Section AA’
Static Pseudo-Static
2.0H:1V 1.58 1.38
2.25H:1V 1.83 1.57
6.2 Edgewater North Embankment
Table 6 presents the calculated FOS for a cut slope required at CH200+235 (as shown in the 50% Detailed
Design Drawings – MoTI Project No. 25042-0000, Rev PD) for the construction of a proposed turn-around area,
adjacent to the north bound lane, located at the northern end of Columbia Road North. Graphical results of each
analysis are presented in Appendix D2.
Groundwater was not encountered during the drilling so no piezometric surface was assumed in this model.
2 March 2020 19115216-007-R-Rev0
7
The Edgewater North cut slope was classified as “Other” (MoTI supplement to CHBDC S6-14, Section 4.4.6.4.)
and therefore the horizontal seismic coefficient used for the pseudo-static analysis was 0.035, which is two-thirds
of the PGA for the 1 in 475 return period factored for Site Class D ground conditions.
Table 6: Analysis Results – Edgewater North
Slope Angle Cross Section BB’
Static Pseudo-Static
2.0H:1V 1.47 1.33
6.3 Harrogate Cut Slope
Table 7 presents the calculated FOS for multiple cut slope orientations considering two cross sections of the
embankment located north of the proposed commercial vehicle inspection facility near the existing pull-out.
Graphical results of each analysis are presented in Appendix D3.
During the drilling investigation groundwater was encountered in borehole AH19-10 at 2.9 mbgs. For modelling
purposes, a phreatic surface at borehole AH19-10 was assumed at 2.9 mbgs. The phreatic surface was modelled
to slope at a steady gradient down towards the Columbia River.
The Harrogate Embankment was classified as a “Major-Route” (MoTI supplement to CHBDC S6-14, Section
4.4.6.4.) and therefore the horizontal seismic coefficient used for the pseudo-static analysis was 0.059, which is
two-thirds of the PGA for the 1 in 975 return period factored for Site Class D ground conditions.
Table 7: Analysis Results - Harrogate
Slope Angle Cross Section CC’ Cross Section DD’
Static Pseudo-Static Static Pseudo-Static
1.5H:1V 1.27 1.13 1.25 1.12
1.75H:1V 1.46 1.28 1.46 1.28
2.0H:1V 1.63 1.42 1.61 1.40
2 March 2020 19115216-007-R-Rev0
8
7.0 COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
7.1 General
The following sections present comments and recommendations pertaining to geotechnical design aspects of the
project based on the results of Golder’s geotechnical investigation and the proposed scope of work provided in
the Conceptual Design Report and 50% Design Drawings (MoTI Project No. 25042-0000, Rev PD). The
information in this section of the report is provided for the guidance of the designers and is intended for this
project only. Contractors bidding on or undertaking the works should examine the information, satisfy themselves
as to the adequacy of the information for construction and make their own interpretation of the factual data as it
affects their proposed construction techniques, schedule, safety and equipment capabilities.
7.2 Site Suitability
Based on the results of the geotechnical investigation, Golder anticipates that the subsurface stratigraphy is
suitable for the proposed highway developments provided that the recommendations presented in this report are
followed.
7.3 Site Preparation
7.3.1 Stripping and Sub-Excavation
Topsoil, organic, deleterious or loose fill materials are not generally considered suitable for direct subgrade
support or re-use as embankment fill and should be stripped/sub-excavated from the entire footprint of proposed
pavement areas. Other Type D fill, as specified in the 2016 Standard Specifications for Highway Construction -
MoTI (2016SS), such as existing road base material, can be left in place or stockpiled for future use as structural
fill.
The subsurface investigation program was intended to determine pavement thicknesses and the composition of
subgrade soils underlying the existing highway. As such, the presence and thickness of topsoil, organics or
otherwise deleterious materials in the areas of toe extensions was not determined during the borehole
investigation. The comments below are estimates based on observations made while on site during the fieldwork.
Edgewater South
Surficial soils in the area of the proposed embankment extension to the east of Hwy 93/95 will likely need to be
stripped to ~200mm to expose the native silty clays.
Edgewater North
Surficial soils in the area of the proposed hammer head on Columbia Road will likely need to be stripped ~150mm
to expose the native prior to cutting and filling for the proposed turnaround.
Harrogate - Embankment
Surficial soils in the area of the proposed embankment extension to the east of Hwy 93/95 will likely need to be
stripped to ~200mm to remove organic materials and topsoil to expose native silty sands and gravels.
2 March 2020 19115216-007-R-Rev0
9
Harrogate – Pull Out Area
Base on borehole logs no significant stripping will be required as type D material is exposed at surface in most
cases. However, there may be localized areas of deleterious materials from previous pit operations. The area
will likely require sub-excavation in order to construct the pavement structure.
7.4 Frost Susceptibility and Protection Depth
The estimated frost penetration depth for the site is approximately 1.3 mbgs, based on a design freezing index of
655.2 degree-days Celsius. This is based on data from the Wasa Weather Station which is located approximately
120 kilometres from Edgewater and 150 kilometres from Harrogate, at a comparable elevation. Therefore, we
recommend that soil placed within 1.3 metres of ground surface have no more than 5% fines in order to mitigate
susceptibility to frost heave.
7.5 Fill
7.5.1 Embankment Fill
No organic, frozen, or otherwise deleterious soil should be placed in the fill section. In addition, fill materials
should not be placed on previously placed fill, if these surfaces are frozen or covered with snow. Furthermore,
placement of fill during poor weather should adhere to 2016SS Section 202.22, unless otherwise specified in the
design documents.
Prior to placement of the structural fill, it is recommended that the exposed subgrade be proof rolled by several
passes of a heavy vibratory steel drum. All structural fill should be placed as recommended in 2016SS Section
201.37.
Excavated native deposits that are free of deleterious materials can be stockpiled and considered for re-use as
embankment grade fill for construction provided that it meets the required material gradation and properties for its
intended use, as determined by a geotechnical engineer, and is free of particles greater than 150 mm in diameter.
Due to frost susceptibility and poor drainage properties the native silty clay and/or clayey silt is not recommended
for re-use as structural fill within the frost influence zone of the final grade. Additionally, should the moisture
content of the native deposits proposed for reuse deviant from the optimum moisture content (determined by
Standard Proctor ASTM D698) the material will require appropriate drying or moisture conditioning prior to
acceptance for use.
7.5.1.1 Fill Beneath Structures
Fill placed beneath proposed structures and/or foundation elements should be Bridge End Fill (BEF) meeting the
gradation presented in 2016SS, Table 202-C.
7.5.2 Landscape Fill
Material that is deemed not suitable for use as structural fill can be stockpiled for landscaping. Care should be
taken to store the material in a location that allows for drainage of the stockpile. Landscape fill should be placed in
accordance with 2016SS section 751.
2 March 2020 19115216-007-R-Rev0
10
7.6 Temporary Cut Slopes and/or Shoring
Temporary excavations should be developed with side slopes no steeper than 1 horizontal to 1 vertical (1H:1V)
for slope heights no greater than 3 m. Shallower side slope angles will be required if seepage is encountered or if
the excavations extend below groundwater level. Excavations should be monitored frequently by qualified
personnel; if signs of instability are observed, a reduced slope angle may be required and a geotechnical engineer
should be consulted.
The stockpiling or storage of excavated spoils, construction materials, heavy equipment or other surcharge
loading should not be permitted within 1 metre of the crest of the excavation slopes to prevent overloading of the
crest and reduce potential for slope movement.
We recommend use of shoring approved by a qualified geotechnical engineer if temporary excavation side slope
angles which exceed 1H:1V are required.
7.7 Permanent Cut and Fill Slopes
The following section presents comments and recommendations pertaining to permanent cut and fill slopes at the
Edgewater South, Edgewater North and Harrogate sites based on the analysis presented in Section 6.0.
The target FOS for the embankments and slope cut are based on the requirements of MoTI’s Supplement to
CHBDC, S6-14 (CHBDC S6-14), Table 4.1 which include an assumed degree of understanding for
embankments (dependent upon level of investigation at each location) and a varying consequence factor. Golder
completed a subsurface investigation program in the area surrounding the embankments which included SPT
blow counts and soil sampling. Although the investigation did not include the sampling of soils though the full
cross section of the embankments, Golder also completed a field assessment of the surficial soil outcrops to help
form our understanding of the embankment stratigraphy. As such, we considered it appropriate to assume a
typical degree of understanding and a typical consequence classification for all sites except the one design cut at
Edgewater North which we have assigned a typical degree of understanding and MoTI has indicated that a low
consequence classification applies. As per Table 6.2b CHBDC S6-14, the required FOS for Global Stability
(Permanent Case) is 1.54 for a typical degree of understanding and typical consequence. For the Edgewater
North cut, the design FOS for the Typical/Low classification is 1.34.
Golder recommends that all permanent slopes be provided with suitable vegetation to mitigate erosion and
sloughing of the surficial embankment soil.
The following sections provide site specific recommendations for each location within the project.
7.7.1 Edgewater South
The Global Stability analysis completed on a representative section of the embankment located adjacent to the
northbound lane, immediately south of the Columbia Road – Highway 93/95 intersection indicates that a slope
angle of 2.0H:1V yields a FOS of 1.58 which exceeds the CHBDC S6-14 recommended target of 1.54. As such
Golder recommends that the permanent cut and fill slopes at the Edgewater South site be developed at a
maximum slope ratio of 2.0H:1V. In order to achieve a 2.0H:1.0V slope, high quality embankment fill (i.e., sand
and gravel) is required. If use of silt and clay materials is considered here, the maximum slope ratio will need to
be reassessed.
2 March 2020 19115216-007-R-Rev0
11
Golder identified zones of inferred stiff SILTY CLAY soils within the area of the proposed roadway widening at
Edgewater South. Extending the embankment east of Highway 93/95 to allow for widening would result in loading
of the potentially compressible soils which could result in differential settlement between the existing and
proposed new embankments. In order to analyse the potential impact of the loading, Golder completed staged
settlement analysis accounting for settlement of the existing embankment, construction of the new embankment
section and construction of the new pavement. Assuming a maximum stiff SILTY CLAY layer of 4 metres, a
minimum 2 weeks between construction of the embankment fill / pavement structure and asphalt placement, and
ignoring secondary consolidation, we have calculated that the differential settlement between the edge of the
existing embankment and new embankment edge will be less than 25 mm over a 20 year design life.
7.7.2 Edgewater North
The Global Stability analysis completed at the proposed turn around area extension on the northbound lane, at
approximately CH200+235 along Columbia Road North indicates that a slope angle of 2.0H:1V yields a FOS of
1.47 which exceeds the CHBDC S6-14 recommended target of 1.34. Golder recommends that the permanent cut
and fill slopes at the Edgewater North site be developed at a maximum slope ratio of 2.0H:1V.
7.7.3 Harrogate Cut Slope
The Global Stability analysis completed on two representative sections of the embankment located north of the
proposed commercial vehicle inspection station indicates that a slope angle of 2.0H:1V yields a FOS of 1.63 for
Section CC’ and 1.61 for Section DD’. As both FOS obtained exceed the CHBDC S6-14 recommended target of
1.54, Golder recommends that the permanent cut and fill slopes at the Harrogate site be developed at 2.0H:1V or
flatter.
7.7.3.1 Harrogate Wet Area
A wet area was observed at the bottom of the Salisbury Road property adjacent to AH19-13 and was identified as
an area of interest by MoTI. Shallow ponding water was identified in the upslope ditch and there were signs of
flow/movement amongst the organic deposits. The borehole log for AH19-13 identified water at 4.8 mbgs in a
layer of gravelly SILTY SAND above a dryer SILTY CLAY to CLAYEY SILT at 5.49m. It is inferred that the water
ponding in the upslope ditch is draining underneath the existing embanking along the path of least resistance
(well-draining granular subgrade). There are no signs of piping failure or washing away of fines on the downslope
side of the road.
Golder has reviewed the Typical Sections (Drawing Number R2-25042-303H), part of the 50% Detailed Design
Drawings for the proposed northbound expansion at Harrogate and notes the use of rockfill to construct the
upslope embankment. In order to help maintain the existing wet area and reduce the flow of water into the new
embankment through the rockfill which could result in erosion of the embankment soils, we propose the inclusion
of a low permeability layer on the upslope embankment face near the wet area. An example of this would be a
layer of clay fill which would reduce the rate of water flow through the embankment fill and promote natural
infiltration of the ponding water into the ground within the existing wet area.
2 March 2020 19115216-007-R-Rev0
12
7.8 Construction Dewatering
Groundwater was observed at depths between 3.0 and 4.8 mbgs during the subsurface investigation at
Harrogate. Golder anticipates that the groundwater depth may fluctuate seasonally and is anticipated to be
shallower during periods of river flooding, snowmelt and/ or heavy rain. As such, there is a potential that
groundwater seepage may be encountered should excavation be required. Provided the seepage level is not
below the natural groundwater elevation, consideration can be given to typical sump and pump methods of
seepage control for excavation dewatering. If excavation is planned below the natural groundwater elevation,
specific dewatering planning and design should be included.
Should seepage or wet zones be encountered during excavation, shallower temporary and permanent slopes may
be required. If the seepage or wet zones are encountered below the toe of the slope, the groundwater may be
managed using ditches and properly filtered sump and pump systems. Water removed from the excavations
should be directed toward a suitable discharge location.
Control of surface water should always be maintained, and surface water should be directed away from all
existing roadways, excavations and exposed subgrade soils.
7.9 Pavement Design
7.9.1 Existing Pavement Structure
The results of the geotechnical investigation indicate that the current pavement structure on Highway 95 consists
of 0.08 to 0.25 metres of asphalt overlying 0.8 to 2.7 metres of silty sand and gravel fill, which is anticipated to
consist of base course and subbase material. The encountered pavement structure for each site is summarised in
Table 8 below.
Table 8: Current Pavement Design
Site Asphalt Thickness
Shoulder (m)
Asphalt Thickness
Trafficked Lane (m)
Fill Thickness (m)
Edgewater South 0.08 0.18 0.8 – 1.3
Edgewater North 0.08 0.25 0.9
Harrogate 0.08 0.18* 0.9 – 2.7
*0.18 m asphalt thickness for the trafficked lane was measured at AH19-08, which is located on Ben Hynes Loop Road at the intersection with Highway 93/95.
The granular pavement courses fill was observed to consist of silty sand and gravel. The silt content of silty
material is considered to be greater than 12%. BC MoTI specifications limit the silt content of granular pavement
courses to be 5% or less. As such the existing granular pavement courses material is not within specification.
While the silty granular courses material was inferred to be of a compact consistency, its drainage properties are
anticipated to be inferior to material with 5% or less silt content. Materials with a lower permeability will likely have
some detrimental impact on pavement performance and design life. However, considering presence of significant
thickness of such granular course material with compact consistency, the material could be left in place as is
unless funding is available to reconstruct the pavement to meet full pavement design specifications.
2 March 2020 19115216-007-R-Rev0
13
7.9.2 Traffic Data Analysis
Golder understands that HWY 1 traffic will be diverted to HWY 93/95 when the Golden to Alberta segment of
HWY 1 closes. From discussions with MoTI, the duration of the closure is anticipated to be about six weeks. To
estimate the traffic that will get diverted, HWY 1 traffic information from Count Station Kicking Horse P-37-5EW-
NN located 15 km east of Route 95 was considered. Based on the 2018 Traffic data, the following diverted
AADT/ESALs traffic are estimated below in Table 9.
Table 9: Diverted AADT/ESALs Traffic Estimate
Hwy 1 Closure
Year
Diverted HWY 1 AADT (ESALS) on Design Lane
Design Lane traffic for one travel lane in
a direction
Design Lane traffic for two travel lanes
in a direction
AADT Six weeks traffic AADT Six weeks traffic
2020 5712 239904 4570 19140
2021 5827 244734 4661 195888
Note: A lane distribution factor of 0.8 applied to one lane traffic to obtain design lane traffic for two lanes in a direction
The traffic estimation on HWY 93/95 excluding HWY 1 diverted traffic was carried out using traffic data from count
station Radium North P-37-7NS-NY located at 1.7 km north of Forsters Landing Road, Radium Hot Springs.
Based on the traffic data, the estimated AADT during 2020 and 2021 are shown below in the Table 10.
Table 10: Estimated AADT during 2020 and 2021
Year Design Lane AADT HWY 95 (ESALs)
Design Lane traffic for one travel lane
direction
Design Lane traffic for two travel lanes in a
direction
2020 932 745
2021 950 760
The 20-year design lane traffic on HWY 95 is estimated to be 8.1 million ESALs for one travel lane in a direction
and 6.48 million for two travel lanes in a direction.
To derive the above estimates, the truck factors shown in Table 11 were used.
Table 11: Truck Factors
Vehicle Length (m) 0.0 – 6.0 6.0 – 12.5 12.5 – 22.5 22.5 – 35.0 35.0 – 99.0
Truck Factor (ESALs) 0.0 2.7 4.7 6.7 5.7
2 March 2020 19115216-007-R-Rev0
14
From the above information, it is observed that compared to 20-year design lane ESALs of HWY 93/95, the traffic
of HWY 1 that will be diverted for six weeks is insignificant to be of concern for long-term performance of the
pavement. However, in short-term, the excessive daily heavy vehicular traffic on HWY 93/95 during those six
weeks of HWY 1 closure may result in pavement distress in the form of rutting or cracking of pavement,
particularly during periods of hot or wet weather requiring some maintenance.
7.9.3 Comments on Existing Pavement
7.9.3.1 Edgewater South
The HWY 93/ 95 asphalt pavement is approximately 180 mm thick underlain by a 1040 mm to 1270 mm layer of
silty sand and gravel fill, over firm silty clay and stiff gravelly clayey silt. We have assumed that the asphalt
pavement thickness is a result of rehabilitation/upgrading of pavement over a period of time. Assuming the
existing asphalt pavement is in good condition, it is our opinion that the existing pavement structure thickness is
sufficient to meet with the 20-year design lane traffic. However, we recommend assessment of structural strength
of existing pavement to determine if upgrading is required.
7.9.3.2 Edgewater North
From the borehole data, HWY 93/ 95 asphalt pavement on the travelled lanes is approximately 250 mm thick,
underlain by 660 mm of gravelly silty sand. On the shoulder, the asphalt is 80 mm thick underlain by 830 mm of
gravelly silty sand. The subgrade consists of stiff to very stiff, gravelly clayey silt/silty clay or compact sandy silty
gravel.
We have assumed that the asphalt pavement thickness is a result of rehabilitation/upgrading of pavement over a
period of time. Assuming the existing asphalt pavement is in good condition, it is our opinion that the existing
pavement structure thickness is sufficient to meet with the 20-year design lane traffic. However, we recommend
assessment of structural strength of existing pavement to determine if upgrading is required.
7.9.3.3 Harrogate
The HWY 93/95 asphalt pavement on the travelled lanes is approximately 180 mm thick (AH19-08), underlain by
580 mm of compact gravelly silty sand, and further underlain by 1980 mm of compact to dense gravelly sand fill.
The underlying native subgrade consists of very stiff to compact soil deposits.
We have assumed that the asphalt pavement thickness is a result of rehabilitation/upgrading of pavement over a
period of time. Assuming that the existing asphalt pavement is in good condition, it is our opinion that the existing
pavement structure thickness is sufficient to meet with the 20-year design life traffic. However, we recommend
assessment of structural strength of existing pavement to determine if upgrading is required.
2 March 2020 19115216-007-R-Rev0
15
7.9.4 New Pavement Construction
7.9.4.1 Edgewater South
HWY 93/95
The following minimum pavement structure for widening along HWY 93/ 95 is recommended:
125 mm Asphaltic concrete; underlain by
300 mm thickness of crushed granular base course; underlain by
300 mm thickness of select granular subbase course; underlain by
Geotechnical engineer approved subgrade.
Columbia Road South
Traffic data for Columbia Road South was not available, therefore, we have assumed the traffic on the road to be
similar to ‘Collector’ type roads in municipalities. For widening along Columbia Road South, the following
minimum pavement structure is recommended:
100 mm Asphaltic concrete; underlain by
100 mm thickness of crushed granular base course; underlain by
300 mm thickness of select granular subbase course; underlain by
Geotechnical engineer approved subgrade
7.9.4.2 Edgewater North
Columbia Road North
Traffic data for Columbia Road North was not available, therefore, we have assumed the traffic on the road to be
similar to ‘Collector’ type roads in municipalities. For the proposed turn around extension on Columbia Road
North, the following minimum pavement structure is recommended:
100 mm Asphaltic concrete; underlain by
100 mm thickness of crushed granular base course; underlain by
300 mm thickness of select granular subbase course; underlain by
Geotechnical engineer approved subgrade.
2 March 2020 19115216-007-R-Rev0
16
7.9.4.3 Harrogate
Additional Northbound Travel Lane
For the additional Northbound lane, the following minimum pavement structure is recommended:
North of Ben Hynes Loop Road
North of Ben Hynes Loop Road it is anticipated that the subgrade would consist of gravelly silty sand of compact
to very dense consistency. Accordingly, the following minimum pavement structure is recommended:
125 mm Asphaltic concrete; underlain by
300 mm thickness of crushed granular base course; underlain by
300 mm thickness of select granular subbase course; underlain by
Geotechnical engineer approved subgrade.
South of Ben Hynes Loop Road
South of Ben Hynes Loop Road it is anticipated that the subgrade would consist of very stiff clayey silt. As such,
in order to promote groundwater drainage, the base of the new pavement structure should be at or below the
underside of the existing pavement structure. Accordingly, the following minimum pavement structure is
recommended:
125 mm Asphaltic concrete; underlain by
300 mm thickness of crushed granular base course; underlain by
500 mm thickness of select granular subbase course; underlain by
Geotechnical engineer approved subgrade.
7.10 Geotechnical Field Review and Materials Testing
Golder should be given the opportunity to review the final plans and specifications to confirm that the geotechnical
engineering recommendations provided herein, or subsequently provided during detailed design, are
appropriately incorporated in the project design prior to tendering the project or at least before construction.
We recommend that all structural fill materials be approved by the geotechnical engineer before being used on
site. Provisions should also be made for experienced geotechnical personnel to review and approve the exposed
subgrade and fill surfaces prior to structural fill placement. Further, we recommend conducting in situ field density
testing on structural fill to confirm that satisfactory compaction is being achieved.
2 March 2020 19115216-007-R-Rev0
18
9.0 REFERENCES
British Columbia Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure (MoTI), Bridge Standards and Procedures Manual,
Volume 1 Supplement to CHBDC S6-14, October 2016
British Columbia Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure (MoTI), Standard Specifications for Highway
Construction, Volume 1/2, Adopted 1 July 2016.
Clague, J (1975). Late Quaternary Sediments and Geomorphic History of the Southern Rocky Mountain Trench,
British Columbia. Department of Geological Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver British
Columbia Canada V6T 1W5. Canadian Journal of Earth Science, 12, 595-605.
CSA Group, Canadian Highway Bridge Design Code (CHBDC) S6-14, April 2014.
830
840
850
840
840
850
830
840
RIVE
RVIE
W R
OAD
PROPOSED PAVEMENT EDGE
PROPOSED PAVEMENT EDGE
AH19-01A
AH19-02
AH19-04
AH19-01B
HIGHWAY 95
SPUR VALLEY
RADIUM HOT SPRINGS
5 616 000 N5 616 000 N
562 300 E 562 300 E
5 615 900 N5 615 900 N
5 615 800 N5 615 800 N
562 200 E 562 200 E
101+100
101+200
101+300
300+
100
AH19-01A
AH19-02
AH19-04
AH19-01B
A
A'
025
mm
19115216PHASE/TASK4000/4030
FIGURE
1A0
2020-01-13
A. WANG
A. MORPETH
G. RUTHERFORD
G. RUTHERFORD
HIGHWAY 95/93 IMPROVEMENTSRADIUM HOT SPRINGS, BC
MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE
TEST HOLE LOCATIONS - EDGEWATER SOUTH TITLE
PROJECT NO. REV.
PROJECTCLIENT
CONSULTANT
PREPARED
DESIGNED
REVIEWED
APPROVED
YYYY-MM-DD
Path
: \\g
olde
r.gds
\gal
\bur
naby
\CAD
-GIS
\Clie
nt\M
inis
try_o
f_Tr
ansp
orta
tion\
Hw
y95_
Rad
ium
Hot
Spr
ings
_BC
\99_
PRO
JEC
TS\1
8112
195\
4000
\403
0\D
OC
_XXX
\02_
PRO
DU
CTI
ON
\DW
G\
| Fi
le N
ame:
181
1219
5-40
00-4
030-
EDG
EWAT
ER.d
wg
| L
ast E
dite
d By
: xin
wan
g D
ate:
202
0-01
-13
Tim
e:3:
08:3
1 PM
| P
rinte
d By
: Xin
Wan
g D
ate:
202
0-01
-13
Tim
e:3:
31:5
4 PM
IF T
HIS
MEA
SUR
EMEN
T D
OES
NO
T M
ATC
H W
HAT
IS S
HO
WN
, TH
E SH
EET
SIZE
HAS
BEE
N M
OD
IFIE
D F
RO
M: A
NSI
B
NOTES
1. ALL DIMENSIONS IN METRES UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.2. COORDINATES ARE IN UTM NAD83 ZONE 11.
REFERENCE
1. BASE INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATIONAND INFRASTRUCTURE.FILE NAME: GEOMLANE-COLUMBIA ROADINTERSECTIONS-Model-EXPORT.dwg RECEIVED DATE: NOVERMBER 28,2019.
EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY CONTOURS
SITE BOUNDARY
PROPOSED DRAINAGE DITCH CENTRE
PROPOSED RIGHT-OF-WAY
AUGER HOLE LOCATION (GOLDER, 2019)
PROPOSED ROAD TOES
LEGEND
0
1:800
20 40
METRES
THIS DRAWING IS INTENDED FOR CLIENT'S ONE TIME USE ONLY AND IT IS NOT INTENDED OR REPRESENTED BY GOLDER TO BE SUITABLE FOR REUSE BYANY PARTY, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE CLIENT, ITS EMPLOYEES, AGENTS, SUBCONTRACTORS OR SUBSEQUENT OWNERS ON ANY EXTENSIONOF A SPECIFIC PROJECT OR FUTURE PROJECTS, WHETHER CLIENT'S OR OTHERWISE, WITHOUT GOLDER'S PRIOR WRITTEN PERMISSION. ANYMANIPULATION, ADAPTATION, MODIFICATION, ALTERATION, MISUSE OR REUSE UNAUTHORIZED BY GOLDER WILL BE AT CLIENT'S SOLE RISK.GOLDER EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ALL LIABILITY AGAINST ALL THIRD PARTIES RELYING, USING OR MAKING DECISIONS ON THIS DRAWING. THIRD PARTIESDO SO AT THEIR OWN RISK. EXCEPT WHERE WRITTEN AGREEMENT STATES OTHERWISE, THIS DRAWING IS THE PROPERTY OF GOLDER ASSOCIATES LTD.
840
PROPOSED ROAD SHOULDER
870
860
850
880
890
890
COLUMBIA ROAD
HIGHWAY 95
PROPOSED PAVEMENT EDGE
AH19-05
AH19-06
SPUR VALLEY
RADIUM HOT SPRINGS
103+100
103+200
103+300
200+300
200+400
200+500
AH19-05
AH19-06
B
B'
5 617 600 N
5 617 600 N
561 400 E
561 400 E
5 617 700 N
5 617 700 N
5 617 500 N
5 617 500 N
5 617 400 N
5 617 400 N
561 300 E
561 300 E
561 200 E
561 200 E
025
mm
19115216PHASE/TASK4000/4030
FIGURE
1B0
2020-01-13
A. WANG
A. MORPETH
G. RUTHERFORD
G. RUTHERFORD
HIGHWAY 95/93 IMPROVEMENTSRADIUM HOT SPRINGS, BC
MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE
TEST HOLE LOCATIONS - EDGEWATER NORTH TITLE
PROJECT NO. REV.
PROJECTCLIENT
CONSULTANT
PREPARED
DESIGNED
REVIEWED
APPROVED
YYYY-MM-DD
Path
: \\g
olde
r.gds
\gal
\bur
naby
\CAD
-GIS
\Clie
nt\M
inis
try_o
f_Tr
ansp
orta
tion\
Hw
y95_
Rad
ium
Hot
Spr
ings
_BC
\99_
PRO
JEC
TS\1
8112
195\
4000
\403
0\D
OC
_XXX
\02_
PRO
DU
CTI
ON
\DW
G\
| Fi
le N
ame:
181
1219
5-40
00-4
030-
EDG
EWAT
ER.d
wg
| L
ast E
dite
d By
: xin
wan
g D
ate:
202
0-01
-13
Tim
e:3:
08:3
1 PM
| P
rinte
d By
: Xin
Wan
g D
ate:
202
0-01
-13
Tim
e:3:
13:0
7 PM
IF T
HIS
MEA
SUR
EMEN
T D
OES
NO
T M
ATC
H W
HAT
IS S
HO
WN
, TH
E SH
EET
SIZE
HAS
BEE
N M
OD
IFIE
D F
RO
M: A
NSI
B
0
1:800
20 40
METRES
THIS DRAWING IS INTENDED FOR CLIENT'S ONE TIME USE ONLY AND IT IS NOT INTENDED OR REPRESENTED BY GOLDER TO BE SUITABLE FOR REUSE BYANY PARTY, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE CLIENT, ITS EMPLOYEES, AGENTS, SUBCONTRACTORS OR SUBSEQUENT OWNERS ON ANY EXTENSIONOF A SPECIFIC PROJECT OR FUTURE PROJECTS, WHETHER CLIENT'S OR OTHERWISE, WITHOUT GOLDER'S PRIOR WRITTEN PERMISSION. ANYMANIPULATION, ADAPTATION, MODIFICATION, ALTERATION, MISUSE OR REUSE UNAUTHORIZED BY GOLDER WILL BE AT CLIENT'S SOLE RISK.GOLDER EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ALL LIABILITY AGAINST ALL THIRD PARTIES RELYING, USING OR MAKING DECISIONS ON THIS DRAWING. THIRD PARTIESDO SO AT THEIR OWN RISK. EXCEPT WHERE WRITTEN AGREEMENT STATES OTHERWISE, THIS DRAWING IS THE PROPERTY OF GOLDER ASSOCIATES LTD.
EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY CONTOURS
LEGEND
840
SITE BOUNDARY
PROPOSED DRAINAGE DITCH CENTRE
PROPOSED RIGHT-OF-WAY
AUGER HOLE LOCATION (GOLDER, 2019)
PROPOSED ROAD TOES
PROPOSED ROAD SHOULDERNOTES
1. ALL DIMENSIONS IN METRES UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.2. COORDINATES ARE IN UTM NAD83 ZONE 11.
REFERENCE
1. BASE INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATIONAND INFRASTRUCTURE.FILE NAME: GEOMLANE-COLUMBIA ROADINTERSECTIONS-Model-EXPORT.dwg RECEIVED DATE: NOVERMBER 28,2019.
HIGHWAY 95
COLUMBIA RIVER
BENHYNES LOOP ROAD
850
840
830
820
810
800
790
790
790
PARSON
SPILLIMACHEEN
PROPOSED PAVEMENT EDGE
PROPOSED PAVEMENT EDGE
5 648
600
N
5 648
600
N
538 000 E
538 000 E
5 648
800
N
5 648
800
N
5 648
400
N
5 648
400
N
5 648
200
N
5 648
200
N
537 800 E
537 800 E
537 600 E
537 600 E
538 200 E
D
D'
C
C'
APPROXIMATE EXTENTS OFOBSERVED SANDY SILTOUTCROP
100+900101+000 101+100 101+200 101+300 101+400 101+500 101+600
AH19-07
AH19-08
AH19-09
AH19-10 AH19-11 AH19-12 AH19-13
025
mm
19115216PHASE/TASK4000/4030
FIGURE
1C0
2020-01-13
A. WANG
A. MORPETH
G. RUTHERFORD
G. RUTHERFORD
HIGHWAY 95/93 IMPROVEMENTSRADIUM HOT SPRINGS, BC
MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE
TEST HOLE LOCATIONS - HARROGATE TITLE
PROJECT NO. REV.
PROJECTCLIENT
CONSULTANT
PREPARED
DESIGNED
REVIEWED
APPROVED
YYYY-MM-DD
Path
: \\g
olde
r.gds
\gal
\bur
naby
\CAD
-GIS
\Clie
nt\M
inis
try_o
f_Tr
ansp
orta
tion\
Hw
y95_
Rad
ium
Hot
Spr
ings
_BC
\99_
PRO
JEC
TS\1
8112
195\
4000
\403
0\D
OC
_XXX
\02_
PRO
DU
CTI
ON
\DW
G\
| Fi
le N
ame:
181
1219
5-40
00-4
030-
HAR
RO
GAT
E.dw
g |
Las
t Edi
ted
By: x
inw
ang
Dat
e: 2
020-
01-1
3 T
ime:
10:4
8:39
AM
| P
rinte
d By
: Xin
Wan
g D
ate:
202
0-01
-13
Tim
e:3:
14:2
4 PM
IF T
HIS
MEA
SUR
EMEN
T D
OES
NO
T M
ATC
H W
HAT
IS S
HO
WN
, TH
E SH
EET
SIZE
HAS
BEE
N M
OD
IFIE
D F
RO
M: A
NSI
B
1:2,000
1000
METRES
50
THIS DRAWING IS INTENDED FOR CLIENT'S ONE TIME USE ONLY AND IT IS NOT INTENDED OR REPRESENTED BY GOLDER TO BE SUITABLE FOR REUSE BYANY PARTY, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE CLIENT, ITS EMPLOYEES, AGENTS, SUBCONTRACTORS OR SUBSEQUENT OWNERS ON ANY EXTENSIONOF A SPECIFIC PROJECT OR FUTURE PROJECTS, WHETHER CLIENT'S OR OTHERWISE, WITHOUT GOLDER'S PRIOR WRITTEN PERMISSION. ANYMANIPULATION, ADAPTATION, MODIFICATION, ALTERATION, MISUSE OR REUSE UNAUTHORIZED BY GOLDER WILL BE AT CLIENT'S SOLE RISK.GOLDER EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ALL LIABILITY AGAINST ALL THIRD PARTIES RELYING, USING OR MAKING DECISIONS ON THIS DRAWING. THIRD PARTIESDO SO AT THEIR OWN RISK. EXCEPT WHERE WRITTEN AGREEMENT STATES OTHERWISE, THIS DRAWING IS THE PROPERTY OF GOLDER ASSOCIATES LTD.
NOTES
1. ALL DIMENSIONS IN METRES UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.2. COORDINATES ARE IN UTM NAD83 ZONE 11.
REFERENCE
1. BASE INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATIONAND INFRASTRUCTURE.FILE NAME: GEOMLANE-COLUMBIA ROADINTERSECTIONS-Model-EXPORT.dwg RECEIVED DATE: NOVERMBER 28,2019.
EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY CONTOURSLEGEND
860
SITE BOUNDARY
PROPOSED DRAINAGE DITCH CENTRE
PROPOSED RIGHT-OF-WAY
AUGER HOLE LOCATION (GOLDER, 2019)
PROPOSED ROAD TOES
PROPOSED ROAD SHOULDER
2 March 2020 19115216-007-R-Rev0
APPENDIX A
Important Information and
Limitations of this Report
APPENDIX A Important Information and Limitations of this Report
19115216-007-R-Rev02 March 2020
1
Standard of Care: Golder Associates Ltd. (Golder) has prepared this report in a manner consistent with that level
of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the engineering and science professions currently practising
under similar conditions in the jurisdiction in which the services are provided, subject to the time limits and
physical constraints applicable to this report. No other warranty, expressed or implied is made.
Basis and Use of the Report: This report has been prepared for the specific site, design objective, development
and purpose described to Golder by the Client. The factual data, interpretations and recommendations pertain to
a specific project as described in this report and are not applicable to any other project or site location. Any
change of site conditions, purpose, development plans or if the project is not initiated within eighteen months of
the date of the report may alter the validity of the report. Golder can not be responsible for use of this report, or
portions thereof, unless Golder is requested to review and, if necessary, revise the report.
The information, recommendations and opinions expressed in this report are for the sole benefit of the Client. No
other party may use or rely on this report or any portion thereof without Golder’s express written consent. If the
report was prepared to be included for a specific permit application process, then upon the reasonable request of
the client, Golder may authorize in writing the use of this report by the regulatory agency as an Approved User for
the specific and identified purpose of the applicable permit review process. Any other use of this report by others
is prohibited and is without responsibility to Golder. The report, all plans, data, drawings and other documents as
well as all electronic media prepared by Golder are considered its professional work product and shall remain the
copyright property of Golder, who authorizes only the Client and Approved Users to make copies of the report, but
only in such quantities as are reasonably necessary for the use of the report by those parties. The Client and
Approved Users may not give, lend, sell, or otherwise make available the report or any portion thereof to any
other party without the express written permission of Golder. The Client acknowledges that electronic media is
susceptible to unauthorized modification, deterioration and incompatibility and therefore the Client cannot rely
upon the electronic media versions of Golder’s report or other work products.
The report is of a summary nature and is not intended to stand alone without reference to the instructions given to
Golder by the Client, communications between Golder and the Client, and to any other reports prepared by
Golder for the Client relative to the specific site described in the report. In order to properly understand the
suggestions, recommendations and opinions expressed in this report, reference must be made to the whole of the
report. Golder can not be responsible for use of portions of the report without reference to the entire report.
Unless otherwise stated, the suggestions, recommendations and opinions given in this report are intended only
for the guidance of the Client in the design of the specific project. The extent and detail of investigations, including
the number of test holes, necessary to determine all of the relevant conditions which may affect construction costs
would normally be greater than has been carried out for design purposes. Contractors bidding on, or undertaking
the work, should rely on their own investigations, as well as their own interpretations of the factual data presented
in the report, as to how subsurface conditions may affect their work, including but not limited to proposed
construction techniques, schedule, safety and equipment capabilities.
Soil, Rock and Groundwater Conditions: Classification and identification of soils, rocks, and geologic units
have been based on commonly accepted methods employed in the practice of geotechnical engineering and
related disciplines. Classification and identification of the type and condition of these materials or units involves
judgment, and boundaries between different soil, rock or geologic types or units may be transitional rather than
abrupt. Accordingly, Golder does not warrant or guarantee the exactness of the descriptions.
APPENDIX A Important Information and Limitations of this Report
19115216-007-R-Rev02 March 2020
2
Special risks occur whenever engineering or related disciplines are applied to identify subsurface conditions and even a comprehensive investigation, sampling and testing program may fail to detect all or certain subsurface conditions. The environmental, geologic, geotechnical, geochemical and hydrogeologic conditions that Golder interprets to exist between and beyond sampling points may differ from those that actually exist. In addition to soil variability, fill of variable physical and chemical composition can be present over portions of the site or on adjacent properties. The professional services retained for this project include only the geotechnical aspects of the subsurface conditions at the site, unless otherwise specifically stated and identified in the report. The presence or implication(s) of possible surface and/or subsurface contamination resulting from previous activities or uses of the site and/or resulting from the introduction onto the site of materials from off-site sources are outside the terms of reference for this project and have not been investigated or addressed.
Soil and groundwater conditions shown in the factual data and described in the report are the observed conditions at the time of their determination or measurement. Unless otherwise noted, those conditions form the basis of the recommendations in the report. Groundwater conditions may vary between and beyond reported locations and can be affected by annual, seasonal and meteorological conditions. The condition of the soil, rock and groundwater may be significantly altered by construction activities (traffic, excavation, groundwater level lowering, pile driving, blasting, etc.) on the site or on adjacent sites. Excavation may expose the soils to changes due to wetting, drying or frost. Unless otherwise indicated the soil must be protected from these changes during construction.
Sample Disposal: Golder will dispose of all uncontaminated soil and/or rock samples 90 days following issue of this report or, upon written request of the Client, will store uncontaminated samples and materials at the Client’s expense. In the event that actual contaminated soils, fills or groundwater are encountered or are inferred to be present, all contaminated samples shall remain the property and responsibility of the Client for proper disposal.
Follow-Up and Construction Services: All details of the design were not known at the time of submission of Golder’s report. Golder should be retained to review the final design, project plans and documents prior to construction, to confirm that they are consistent with the intent of Golder’s report.
During construction, Golder should be retained to perform sufficient and timely observations of encountered conditions to confirm and document that the subsurface conditions do not materially differ from those interpreted conditions considered in the preparation of Golder’s report and to confirm and document that construction activities do not adversely affect the suggestions, recommendations and opinions contained in Golder’s report. Adequate field review, observation and testing during construction are necessary for Golder to be able to provide letters of assurance, in accordance with the requirements of many regulatory authorities. In cases where this recommendation is not followed, Golder’s responsibility is limited to interpreting accurately the information encountered at the borehole locations, at the time of their initial determination or measurement during the preparation of the Report.
Changed Conditions and Drainage: Where conditions encountered at the site differ significantly from those anticipated in this report, either due to natural variability of subsurface conditions or construction activities, it is a condition of this report that Golder be notified of any changes and be provided with an opportunity to review or revise the recommendations within this report. Recognition of changed soil and rock conditions requires experience and it is recommended that Golder be employed to visit the site with sufficient frequency to detect if conditions have changed significantly.
Drainage of subsurface water is commonly required either for temporary or permanent installations for the project. Improper design or construction of drainage or dewatering can have serious consequences. Golder takes no responsibility for the effects of drainage unless specifically involved in the detailed design and construction monitoring of the system.
2 March 2020 19115216-007-R-Rev0
APPENDIX B
Geotechnical Data Report
REPORT
Geotechnical Data Report Highway 95 Improvements, Radium Hot Springs, BC
Submitted to:
BC Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure Attn: David Tracz, PEng
4th Floor, 310 Ward Street
Nelson, BC
V1L 5S4 Canada
Submitted by:
Golder Associates Ltd.
590 McKay Avenue, Suite 300
Kelowna, British Columbia,
V1Y 5A8 Canada
+1 250 860 8424
19115216-4000-006-R-Rev0
13 January 2020
13 January 2020 19115216-4000-006-R-Rev0
ii
Table of Contents
1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................. 1
2.0 PROJECT UNDERSTANDING ....................................................................................................................... 1
3.0 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION ............................................................................................................... 2
3.1 Desktop Study ...................................................................................................................................... 2
3.2 Site Reconnaissance ........................................................................................................................... 2
3.2.1 Edgewater South............................................................................................................................. 2
3.2.2 Edgewater North ............................................................................................................................. 2
3.2.3 Harrogate ........................................................................................................................................ 3
3.3 Drilling Program.................................................................................................................................... 3
3.4 Laboratory Testing ............................................................................................................................... 4
4.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS ........................................................................................................................ 5
4.1 Subsurface Soil Conditions .................................................................................................................. 5
4.1.1 Edgewater South............................................................................................................................. 5
4.1.2 Edgewater North ............................................................................................................................. 5
4.1.3 Harrogate ........................................................................................................................................ 6
4.2 Groundwater......................................................................................................................................... 7
4.3 Laboratory Testing ............................................................................................................................... 7
5.0 CLOSURE ....................................................................................................................................................... 8
TABLES
Table 1: Highway 95 Improvement Details ............................................................................................................... 1
Table 2: Borehole Summary ..................................................................................................................................... 4
Table 3: Laboratory Testing Results Summary ........................................................................................................ 7
FIGURES
Figure 1 – Site Location Plans
13 January 2020 19115216-4000-006-R-Rev0
iii
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A Important Information and Limitations of this Report
APPENDIX B Record of Boreholes
APPENDIX C Laboratory Testing Results
13 January 2020 19115216-4000-006-R-Rev0
1
1.0 INTRODUCTION
As requested by the Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure (MoTI), Golder Associates Ltd. (Golder) has
carried out a geotechnical investigation for the proposed improvements to Highway 95 between Golden and
Radium Hot Springs (Radium), BC. The purpose of the geotechnical investigation was to assess the soil and
groundwater conditions at three proposed sites (Harrogate, Edgewater North and Edgewater South), and based
on the results of the investigation, provides comments and recommendations pertaining to geotechnical aspects
of the proposed highway improvements.
The geotechnical investigation was carried out in accordance with the scope of work presented in our proposal,
dated 8 October 2019 (Golder Reference 19115216-001-TM-Rev1-4000) and as modified by subsequent email
directions from MoTI. It should be noted that the scope of work for Spillmacheen was not carried out as part of this
geotechnical investigation, as requested by MoTI following issue of the proposal.
It should be noted that this scope of work is limited to the geotechnical investigation outlined in the proposal and
does not include any investigations, analytical testing or assessments for possible soil and groundwater
contamination, archaeological or biological considerations or erosion and/or sediment control measures.
This report should be read in conjunction with the “Important Information and Limitations of this Report” provided
in Appendix A. We specifically direct the reader’s attention to this information, as it is essential for the proper use
and interpretation of this report.
2.0 PROJECT UNDERSTANDING
Based on the Conceptual Design Report and Drawings provided by MoTI, dated September and October 2019, as
well as the 50% Detailed Design Drawings dated 15 November 2019, Golder understands that traffic will be
temporarily detoured along Highway 95/93 during planned improvements to the Trans-Canada Highway between
Golden and the Alberta border. With this temporary significant increase in traffic, three sites along Highway 95
have been identified as priorities for safety and capacity upgrades.
The proposed improvements to these sites have been summarised in Table 1 below.
Table 1: Highway 95 Improvement Details
Site Distance South
of Golden (km)
Existing Infrastructure Proposed Development
Harrogate 52 Historic borrow area located northeast
of the highway used as a gravel pull-
out
Develop a commercial vehicle inspection
facility near the existing pull-out including
improved turning lanes
Edgewater
North
92 Existing intersection with Columbia
Road, north of Edgewater
Improve the intersection and turning lanes
Edgewater
South
94 Existing intersection with Columbia
Road (Riverview Road), south of
Edgewater
Improve the intersection and turning lanes
13 January 2020 19115216-4000-006-R-Rev0
2
3.0 GEOTECHNICAL INVESTIGATION
3.1 Desktop Study
Prior to undertaking the investigation program, Golder reviewed available technical literature pertaining to the
general site conditions and depositional environment of the sites. The sites span an approximately 42 km section
of Highway 95 which runs north-south adjacent to the Anastomosing upper Columbia River along the east side of
the Columbia Valley region of the Rocky Mountain Trench, which separates the Columbia Mountains (west) from
the Rocky Mountains (east). The Columbia Valley was primarily formed by geological faulting, however, has also
been considerably shaped by each Pleistocene glaciation.1
Based on the geomorphological environment, Golder anticipates that the subsurface stratigraphy primarily
comprises layers of glacial, glaciofluvial and glaciolacustrine deposits overlain by high and low energy alluvial
deposits. Due to the proximity of the highway to the base of the Rocky Mountains isolated coarse-grained colluvial
deposits may be encountered.
3.2 Site Reconnaissance
A site reconnaissance was carried out by a member of Golder’s geotechnical team on 7 November 2019. The
purpose of the site visit was to examine each site for any significant features/areas and determine appropriate test
locations.
3.2.1 Edgewater South
Golder understands that potential widening of Highway 95 south of the intersection with Columbia Road South is
proposed (Edgewater South). As such Golder completed a reconnaissance of the embankment adjacent to the
northbound lane of Highway 5 in this area. The embankment was measured to be about 6 m high with a slope of
35 to 40 degrees. Surficial soil conditions comprise SAND and GRAVEL fill overlying native gravelly CLAYEY
SILT. The embankment was lightly vegetated with grasses. No water flow was observed from the embankment
face.
3.2.2 Edgewater North
Golder understands that improvement of the intersection of Highway 95 and Columbia Road North is proposed
(Edgewater North). As such, Golder completed a reconnaissance of the proposed drillhole locations and soil
embankments in the area. A soil cut observed in the area was comprised of gravelly CLAYEY SILT. The
embankment was measured at about 8 m high with a slope of 30 to 40 degrees. The highway surface at the
corner of Columbia Road North and Highway 95 appeared to have been recently paved.
1 Clague, J (1975). Late Quaternary Sediments and Geomorphic History of the Southern Rocky Mountain Trench, British Columbia. Department of Geological Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver British Columbia Canada V6T 1W5. Canadian Journal of Earth Science, 12, 595-605.
13 January 2020 19115216-4000-006-R-Rev0
3
3.2.3 Harrogate
Golder understands that two addition traffic lanes to the east side of the highway is being proposed as part of the
planned commercial vehicle inspection facility in Harrogate. As such Golder reviewed the cut slopes adjacent the
highway at the proposed site of the commercial vehicle inspection facility in Harrogate, immediately north of the
historic borrow area. The embankment was noted to be approximately 10 m in height with a slope of 35 to 40
degrees. The surficial soil conditions comprised non-cohesive sandy SILT, some gravel to silty SANDY GRAVEL.
The embankment was lightly vegetated with grasses. No water flow was observed from the embankment face.
Water was noted intermittently along both sides of Highway 95 in the Harrogate area; but is most significant at the
bottom of the Salisbury Road property adjacent to AH19-13 (as emphasised by the property owner). The water is
shallow and signs of flow/movement were noted amongst the organic deposits associated with this wet area.
Golder were asked to review an area of potential water infiltration adjacent to the Highway 95/Bens Hynes Loop
Road intersection (Harrogate). No significant water or indications of infiltration were noted. A culvert was identified
beneath the highway running west from the southeast corner of Highway 95/Ben Hynes Loop Road, adjacent to
AH19-08.
3.3 Drilling Program
Prior to commencing the subsurface investigation program Golder engaged Locates Unlimited Services Ltd. to
carry out a BC One Call and assess the proposed borehole locations for potential underground utilities.
The borehole drilling program was carried out from 12 November 2019 to 19 November 2019 to assess the
existing pavement structure and soil and groundwater conditions at the proposed sites. Geotech Drilling Services
Ltd. (Geotech) were engaged to advance 12 boreholes using auger drilling techniques to depths of between 2.7
and 6.7 metres below ground surface (mbgs). D&B Flagging Ltd. were contracted to provide traffic management
services. The test locations are presented in Figure 1.
Standard Penetration Testing (SPT) was carried out at 1.5 metre intervals in the boreholes using a 50 millimetre-
diameter spilt spoon sampler. The sampler was advanced using a 63.5-kilogram automatic trip hammer dropped
from a height of 760 millimetres. The number of blows required to advance the sampler 450 millimetres was
recorded and used to determine the uncorrected SPT “N” value. Upon completion of each SPT, the split spoon
sampler was retrieved, opened and the recovered soil was photographed, classified and stored in a sealed,
labelled sample bag. Shelby Tube samples were also collected in fine-grained soils in the Edgewater South area,
and disturbed “grab” samples were collected from auger cuttings as necessary.
The drilling program was completed under the full-time supervision of a member of Golder’s geotechnical team
who located the boreholes, logged the subsurface geotechnical conditions, and collected representative soil
samples for visual review and subsequent laboratory testing. Upon completion of drilling, the boreholes were
backfilled and sealed with cold patch asphalt. Geotechnical samples collected during the investigation were
transported to Golder’s Laboratory in Burnaby, BC. Records of the boreholes are provided in Appendix B.
A summary of the borehole locations is provided in Table 2 below. The coordinates of each borehole were
obtained using a handheld Global Positioning System (GPS) device with an accuracy of approximately ±5 metres.
Coordinates are recorded using UTM NAD83 Zone 11. It should be noted that AH19-03 was not drilled during the
investigation due to access restrictions.
13 January 2020 19115216-4000-006-R-Rev0
4
Table 2: Borehole Summary
Site Test ID Northing (m) Easting (m) Final Depth (mbgs)
Edgewater South AH19-01A 0562275 5615808 5.2
Edgewater South AH19-01B 0562264 5615793 2.1
Edgewater South AH19-02 0562242 5615948 5.2
Edgewater South AH19-03 Not drilled
Edgewater South AH19-04 0562288 5616033 5.2
Edgewater North AH19-05 0561294 5617612 5.2
Edgewater North AH19-06 0561307 5617697 5.2
Harrogate AH19-07 0538021 5648164 2.7
Harrogate AH19-08 0537929 5648315 5.2
Harrogate AH19-09 0537903 5648401 4.0
Harrogate AH19-10 0537828 5648431 5.2
Harrogate AH19-11 0537767 5648513 6.7
Harrogate AH19-12 0537676 5648636 5.2
Harrogate AH19-13 0537622 5648707 6.7
Note: m = metres; masl = metres above sea level; mbgs = metres below ground surface
Borehole AH19-01B was drilled next to AH19-01 to obtain a Shelby Tube sample of the fine-grained soil
encountered in AH19-01A between 1.5 and 2.1 mbgs.
3.4 Laboratory Testing
The following laboratory tests were carried out on disturbed and undisturbed samples collected during the drilling
program:
Water Content Determination (ASTM D2216) – 18 tests
Particle Size Distribution (ASTM D6913) – 8 tests
Atterberg Limits (ASTM D4318) – 10 tests
Laboratory Hand Vane Test (ASTM D4648/D4648M-16) – 1 test
All soil testing was conducted at Golder’s material testing laboratory in Burnaby, BC. Each soil test was
carried out in accordance with their respective American Society for Testing Materials (ASTM) standards. When
interpreting the results, it is important to note that there is likely a sampling bias in the sieve analysis results due
to the drilling and sample recovery method; and as such, these results should be interpreted with that bias in
mind. Specifically, the drilling method will not provide suitable representation of any cobbles and boulders
encountered in the subsurface.
13 January 2020 19115216-4000-006-R-Rev0
5
Results of the laboratory testing are provided in Appendix C and are summarised in Section 4.3. The results are
also included in the Record of Boreholes summary sheets in Appendix B.
4.0 SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS
Detailed descriptions of the subsurface soil conditions encountered at the time of the field investigation are
presented in the Record of Borehole log sheets in Appendix B along with a description of the soil classification
system used and a list of symbols and abbreviations for the proper interpretation of the soil information. The soil
descriptions are based on commonly accepted methods of classification and identification employed in
geotechnical practice.
Classification and identification of soil requires judgement and Golder does not guarantee descriptions as exact
but infers accuracy to the extent that is common in current geotechnical practice. The depths of stratigraphic
changes are generally approximate and inferred since there is often a gradual transition between soil types. It
should be noted that it is expected that variations in the subsurface conditions may occur between and beyond
the location of the boreholes.
The subsurface conditions encountered during the geotechnical investigation are summarised in the following
sections.
4.1 Subsurface Soil Conditions
4.1.1 Edgewater South
Asphalt
The asphalt thickness on the shoulder of Highway 95 (AH19-01A, AH19-01B, and AH19-04) was measured to be
0.18 metres. The asphalt thickness on Columbia Road/Riverside Road (AH19-02) was 0.08 metres.
Fill Material
Fill material at Edgewater South was generally described as dark brown SILTY SAND and GRAVEL. The soil was
dry and has an inferred density of compact. Fill material was encountered below asphalt to a maximum depth of
approximately 1.5 mbgs in AH19-01A, 1.2 mbgs in AH19-04, and 0.8 mbgs in AH19-02.
Native Soils
Native soil at Edgewater South was generally described as light brown to greyish brown, SILTY CLAY to SILT.
Based on SPT results, the consistency of the soil ranges from soft to very stiff, generally becoming stiffer with
depth. The moisture content ranges from below to equal to the plastic limit. A layer of brown, stiff gravelly
CLAYEY SILT was also encountered in AH19-04 between 1.2 mbgs and 2.9 mbgs.
4.1.2 Edgewater North
Asphalt
The asphalt thickness at the Highway 95/Columbia Road intersection (AH19-05) was measured to be 0.25
metres. The asphalt thickness on the shoulder of Highway 95 (AH19-06) was 0.08 metres.
13 January 2020 19115216-4000-006-R-Rev0
6
Fill Material
Fill material at Edgewater North generally ranges from dark brown gravelly SILTY SAND to SILTY SAND and
GRAVEL. The soil was dry and has an inferred density of compact. Fill material was encountered below asphalt to
a maximum depth of approximately 0.9 mbgs.
Native Soils
The native soil encountered at Edgewater North was variable and generally comprised the following units:
Brown, moist gravelly SILTY SAND to sandy SILTY GRAVEL was encountered from 0.9 mbgs to 1.4 mbgs.
The density of this soil was inferred as compact.
Light brown, cohesive gravelly/sandy CLAYEY SILT and SILTY CLAY was encountered from 1.4 mbgs to
maximum depth of 5.2 mbgs. Based on SPT results, the consistency of this soil was determined to be soft to
very stiff, with a moisture content ranging between less than and equal to the plastic limit.
Brown to greyish brown, dry to moist SAND and GRAVEL was encountered from 4.4 mbgs to termination
depth of 5.2 mbgs in AH19-06. Based on SPT results, the density of this soil was determined to be dense.
4.1.3 Harrogate
Asphalt
The asphalt along the shoulder of Highway 95 in Harrogate was consistently 0.08 metres thick.
Fill Material
Fill material at Harrogate generally ranges from dark brown to brown, gravelly SILTY SAND to SILTY SAND and
GRAVEL. The soil was dry and has an inferred density of compact. Fill material was encountered to a maximum
depth of 0.9 mbgs along the shoulder of Highway 95, and to 2.7 mbgs at the Highway 95/Ben Hynes Loop Road
intersection (AH19-08). Within the existing gravel pull-out, the fill depth was approximately 2.4 metres (AH19-09).
Native Soils
The native soil encountered at Harrogate was relatively consistent across the site and generally comprised the
following units:
Brown to greyish brown, gravelly SILTY SAND to SAND and GRAVEL was encountered in all Harrogate
boreholes with depth ranging between 1.1 mbgs and 5.2 mbgs. Based on SPT results, the density of this soil
was determined to be compact to very dense, with a moisture content ranging from dry to saturated. Cobbles
and boulders were also noted in some boreholes.
This unit is underlain by light brown to grey CLAYEY SILT to SILTY CLAY, as identified in AH19-08, AH19-
10 and AH19-13. This soil was encountered at depth of between 4.4 mbgs to maximum termination depth of
6.7 mbgs. Based on SPT results, the consistency of this soil was determined to be firm to very stiff, with a
moisture content ranging equal to/greater than the plastic limit.
In the most southern boreholes (AH19-07 and AH19-08), brown to light brown CLAYEY SILT was noted
below fill material between 0.9 mbgs and 3.2 mbgs. Based on SPT results, the consistency of this soil was
very stiff and moisture content equal to the plastic limit.
13 January 2020 19115216-4000-006-R-Rev0
7
4.2 Groundwater
Groundwater was encountered at Harrogate in AH19-10 at 2.9 mbgs, AH19-11 at 3.0 mbgs, and at AH19-13 at
4.8 mbgs. Groundwater was not encountered at Edgewater North or Edgewater South.
4.3 Laboratory Testing
Soil testing was carried out on 18 representative samples collected during the field investigation and have been
used to confirm field soil descriptions. The results of the laboratory tests are summarised in Table 3 below. A
complete set of laboratory testing results are provided in Appendix C.
A Laboratory Hand Vane Test was carried out on the undisturbed soil sample from AH19-01B at 1.6 mbgs. The
results indicate that the soil is stiff with an undrained shear strength of 60 kPa and moisture content of 26.8%.
Table 3: Laboratory Testing Results Summary
Borehole
ID
Depth
(mbgs)
Water
Content
(%)
Sieve Analysis Plasticity
Index
Soil Description
Gravel
(%)
Sand
(%)
Fines
(%)
AH19-01A 1.52-2.13 27.7 - - - 10.0 SILTY CLAY (CI)
AH19-01A 4.57-5.18 28.4 0.0 1.1 98.9 13.0 SILTY CLAY (CI)
AH19-02 0.91-1.22 23.0 - - - 10.0 SILTY CLAY (CI)
AH19-02 1.52-2.13 23.7 - - - 7.0 SILTY CLAY (CL)
AH19-02 3.05-3.66 14.7 - - - 0.0 SILT (ML)
AH19-04 1.52-2.13 13.8 35.9 16.3 47.8 - gravelly CLAYEY SILT (ML)
AH19-06 1.52-2.13 27.8 - - - 12.0 SILTY CLAY (CI)
AH19-06 3.05-3.66 17.4 0.5 33.6 65.9 3.0 sandy SILT (ML)
AH19-06 4.57-5.18 2.0 48.4 43.6 8.0 - SAND and GRAVEL (SW/GW)
AH19-07 0.91-1.52 30.0 - - - 11.0 CLAYEY SILT (ML)
AH19-08 0.91-1.52 4.0 43.8 41.9 9.5 - SAND and GRAVEL (SW/GW)
AH19-09 1.52-2.13 2.8 38.0 50.0 12.0 - SAND and GRAVEL (SW/GW)
AH19-10 1.52-2.13 2.2 - - - - gravelly SILTY SAND (SM)
AH19-12 0.08-0.30 2.7 59.3 37.3 3.4 - SAND and GRAVEL (SW/GW)
AH19-12 1.52-2.13 3.4 43.5 47.4 9.1 - SAND and GRAVEL (SW/GW)
AH19-13 4.57-5.18 10.4 - - - - gravelly SILTY SAND (SM)
AH19-13 6.10-6.71 27.0 - - - 6.0 SILTY CLAY to CLAYEY SILT
(CL-ML)
830
840
850
840
840
850
830
840
RIVE
RVIE
W R
OAD
PROPOSED PAVEMENT EDGE
PROPOSED PAVEMENT EDGE
AH19-01A
AH19-02
AH19-04
AH19-01B
HIGHWAY 95
SPUR VALLEY
RADIUM HOT SPRINGS
5 616 000 N5 616 000 N
562 300 E 562 300 E
5 615 900 N5 615 900 N
5 615 800 N5 615 800 N
562 200 E 562 200 E
101+100
101+200
101+300
300+
100
AH19-01A
AH19-02
AH19-04
AH19-01B
025
mm
19115216PHASE/TASK4000/4030
FIGURE
1A0
2020-01-13
A. WANG
A. MORPETH
G. RUTHERFORD
G. RUTHERFORD
HIGHWAY 95/93 IMPROVEMENTSRADIUM HOT SPRINGS, BC
MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE
TEST HOLE LOCATIONS - EDGEWATER SOUTH TITLE
PROJECT NO. REV.
PROJECTCLIENT
CONSULTANT
PREPARED
DESIGNED
REVIEWED
APPROVED
YYYY-MM-DD
Path
: \\g
olde
r.gds
\gal
\bur
naby
\CAD
-GIS
\Clie
nt\M
inis
try_o
f_Tr
ansp
orta
tion\
Hw
y95_
Rad
ium
Hot
Spr
ings
_BC
\99_
PRO
JEC
TS\1
8112
195\
4000
\403
0\D
OC
_XXX
\02_
PRO
DU
CTI
ON
\DW
G\
| Fi
le N
ame:
181
1219
5-40
00-4
030-
EDG
EWAT
ER.d
wg
| L
ast E
dite
d By
: xin
wan
g D
ate:
202
0-01
-09
Tim
e:9:
57:0
2 AM
| P
rinte
d By
: Xin
Wan
g D
ate:
202
0-01
-13
Tim
e:10
:09:
36 A
M
IF T
HIS
MEA
SUR
EMEN
T D
OES
NO
T M
ATC
H W
HAT
IS S
HO
WN
, TH
E SH
EET
SIZE
HAS
BEE
N M
OD
IFIE
D F
RO
M: A
NSI
B
NOTES
1. ALL DIMENSIONS IN METRES UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.2. COORDINATES ARE IN UTM NAD83 ZONE 11.
REFERENCE
1. BASE INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATIONAND INFRASTRUCTURE.FILE NAME: GEOMLANE-COLUMBIA ROADINTERSECTIONS-Model-EXPORT.dwg RECEIVED DATE: NOVERMBER 28,2019.
EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY CONTOURS
SITE BOUNDARY
PROPOSED DRAINAGE DITCH CENTRE
PROPOSED RIGHT-OF-WAY
AUGER HOLE LOCATION (GOLDER, 2019)
PROPOSED ROAD TOES
LEGEND
0
1:800
20 40
METRES
THIS DRAWING IS INTENDED FOR CLIENT'S ONE TIME USE ONLY AND IT IS NOT INTENDED OR REPRESENTED BY GOLDER TO BE SUITABLE FOR REUSE BYANY PARTY, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE CLIENT, ITS EMPLOYEES, AGENTS, SUBCONTRACTORS OR SUBSEQUENT OWNERS ON ANY EXTENSIONOF A SPECIFIC PROJECT OR FUTURE PROJECTS, WHETHER CLIENT'S OR OTHERWISE, WITHOUT GOLDER'S PRIOR WRITTEN PERMISSION. ANYMANIPULATION, ADAPTATION, MODIFICATION, ALTERATION, MISUSE OR REUSE UNAUTHORIZED BY GOLDER WILL BE AT CLIENT'S SOLE RISK.GOLDER EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ALL LIABILITY AGAINST ALL THIRD PARTIES RELYING, USING OR MAKING DECISIONS ON THIS DRAWING. THIRD PARTIESDO SO AT THEIR OWN RISK. EXCEPT WHERE WRITTEN AGREEMENT STATES OTHERWISE, THIS DRAWING IS THE PROPERTY OF GOLDER ASSOCIATES LTD.
840
PROPOSED ROAD SHOULDER
870
860
85088
0
890
890
880
890
900
COLUMBIA ROAD
HIGHWAY 95
HIGHWAY 95
AH19-05
AH19-06
SPUR VALLEY
RADIUM HOT SPRINGS
5 617 700 N
5 617 700 N
561 300 E
561 300 E
5 617 800 N
5 617 800 N
5 617 600 N
5 617 600 N
5 617 500 N
5 617 500 N
561 200 E
561 200 E
561 400 E
561 400 E
103+200
103+300
103+400200+400 200+500
AH19-05
AH19-06
025
mm
19115216PHASE/TASK4000/4030
FIGURE
1B0
2020-01-13
A. WANG
A. MORPETH
G. RUTHERFORD
G. RUTHERFORD
HIGHWAY 95/93 IMPROVEMENTSRADIUM HOT SPRINGS, BC
MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE
TEST HOLE LOCATIONS - EDGEWATER NORTH TITLE
PROJECT NO. REV.
PROJECTCLIENT
CONSULTANT
PREPARED
DESIGNED
REVIEWED
APPROVED
YYYY-MM-DD
Path
: \\g
olde
r.gds
\gal
\bur
naby
\CAD
-GIS
\Clie
nt\M
inis
try_o
f_Tr
ansp
orta
tion\
Hw
y95_
Rad
ium
Hot
Spr
ings
_BC
\99_
PRO
JEC
TS\1
8112
195\
4000
\403
0\D
OC
_XXX
\02_
PRO
DU
CTI
ON
\DW
G\
| Fi
le N
ame:
181
1219
5-40
00-4
030-
EDG
EWAT
ER.d
wg
| L
ast E
dite
d By
: xin
wan
g D
ate:
202
0-01
-09
Tim
e:9:
57:0
2 AM
| P
rinte
d By
: Xin
Wan
g D
ate:
202
0-01
-13
Tim
e:10
:27:
40 A
M
IF T
HIS
MEA
SUR
EMEN
T D
OES
NO
T M
ATC
H W
HAT
IS S
HO
WN
, TH
E SH
EET
SIZE
HAS
BEE
N M
OD
IFIE
D F
RO
M: A
NSI
B
0
1:800
20 40
METRES
THIS DRAWING IS INTENDED FOR CLIENT'S ONE TIME USE ONLY AND IT IS NOT INTENDED OR REPRESENTED BY GOLDER TO BE SUITABLE FOR REUSE BYANY PARTY, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE CLIENT, ITS EMPLOYEES, AGENTS, SUBCONTRACTORS OR SUBSEQUENT OWNERS ON ANY EXTENSIONOF A SPECIFIC PROJECT OR FUTURE PROJECTS, WHETHER CLIENT'S OR OTHERWISE, WITHOUT GOLDER'S PRIOR WRITTEN PERMISSION. ANYMANIPULATION, ADAPTATION, MODIFICATION, ALTERATION, MISUSE OR REUSE UNAUTHORIZED BY GOLDER WILL BE AT CLIENT'S SOLE RISK.GOLDER EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ALL LIABILITY AGAINST ALL THIRD PARTIES RELYING, USING OR MAKING DECISIONS ON THIS DRAWING. THIRD PARTIESDO SO AT THEIR OWN RISK. EXCEPT WHERE WRITTEN AGREEMENT STATES OTHERWISE, THIS DRAWING IS THE PROPERTY OF GOLDER ASSOCIATES LTD.
EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY CONTOURS
LEGEND
840
SITE BOUNDARY
PROPOSED DRAINAGE DITCH CENTRE
PROPOSED RIGHT-OF-WAY
AUGER HOLE LOCATION (GOLDER, 2019)
PROPOSED ROAD TOES
PROPOSED ROAD SHOULDERNOTES
1. ALL DIMENSIONS IN METRES UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.2. COORDINATES ARE IN UTM NAD83 ZONE 11.
REFERENCE
1. BASE INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATIONAND INFRASTRUCTURE.FILE NAME: GEOMLANE-COLUMBIA ROADINTERSECTIONS-Model-EXPORT.dwg RECEIVED DATE: NOVERMBER 28,2019.
HIGHWAY 95
COLUMBIA RIVER
BENHYNES LOOP ROAD
850
840
830
820
810
800
790
790
790
PARSON
SPILLIMACHEEN
PROPERSED PAVEMENT EDGE
PROPERSED PAVEMENT EDGE
5 648
600
N
5 648
600
N
538 000 E
538 000 E
5 648
800
N
5 648
800
N
5 648
400
N
5 648
400
N
5 648
200
N
5 648
200
N
537 800 E
537 800 E
537 600 E
537 600 E
538 200 E
APPROXIMATE EXTENTS OFOBSERVED SANDY SILTOUTCROP
100+900101+000 101+100 101+200 101+300 101+400 101+500 101+600
AH19-07
AH19-08
AH19-09
AH19-10 AH19-11 AH19-12 AH19-13
025
mm
19115216PHASE/TASK4000/4030
FIGURE
1C0
2020-01-13
A. WANG
A. MORPETH
G. RUTHERFORD
G. RUTHERFORD
HIGHWAY 95/93 IMPROVEMENTSRADIUM HOT SPRINGS, BC
MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE
TEST HOLE LOCATIONS - HARROGATE TITLE
PROJECT NO. REV.
PROJECTCLIENT
CONSULTANT
PREPARED
DESIGNED
REVIEWED
APPROVED
YYYY-MM-DD
Path
: \\g
olde
r.gds
\gal
\bur
naby
\CAD
-GIS
\Clie
nt\M
inis
try_o
f_Tr
ansp
orta
tion\
Hw
y95_
Rad
ium
Hot
Spr
ings
_BC
\99_
PRO
JEC
TS\1
8112
195\
4000
\403
0\D
OC
_XXX
\02_
PRO
DU
CTI
ON
\DW
G\
| Fi
le N
ame:
181
1219
5-40
00-4
030-
HAR
RO
GAT
E.dw
g |
Las
t Edi
ted
By: x
inw
ang
Dat
e: 2
020-
01-1
3 T
ime:
10:4
8:39
AM
| P
rinte
d By
: Xin
Wan
g D
ate:
202
0-01
-13
Tim
e:10
:49:
21 A
M
IF T
HIS
MEA
SUR
EMEN
T D
OES
NO
T M
ATC
H W
HAT
IS S
HO
WN
, TH
E SH
EET
SIZE
HAS
BEE
N M
OD
IFIE
D F
RO
M: A
NSI
B
1:2,000
1000
METRES
50
THIS DRAWING IS INTENDED FOR CLIENT'S ONE TIME USE ONLY AND IT IS NOT INTENDED OR REPRESENTED BY GOLDER TO BE SUITABLE FOR REUSE BYANY PARTY, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, THE CLIENT, ITS EMPLOYEES, AGENTS, SUBCONTRACTORS OR SUBSEQUENT OWNERS ON ANY EXTENSIONOF A SPECIFIC PROJECT OR FUTURE PROJECTS, WHETHER CLIENT'S OR OTHERWISE, WITHOUT GOLDER'S PRIOR WRITTEN PERMISSION. ANYMANIPULATION, ADAPTATION, MODIFICATION, ALTERATION, MISUSE OR REUSE UNAUTHORIZED BY GOLDER WILL BE AT CLIENT'S SOLE RISK.GOLDER EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ALL LIABILITY AGAINST ALL THIRD PARTIES RELYING, USING OR MAKING DECISIONS ON THIS DRAWING. THIRD PARTIESDO SO AT THEIR OWN RISK. EXCEPT WHERE WRITTEN AGREEMENT STATES OTHERWISE, THIS DRAWING IS THE PROPERTY OF GOLDER ASSOCIATES LTD.
NOTES
1. ALL DIMENSIONS IN METRES UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.2. COORDINATES ARE IN UTM NAD83 ZONE 11.
REFERENCE
1. BASE INFORMATION RECEIVED FROM MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATIONAND INFRASTRUCTURE.FILE NAME: GEOMLANE-COLUMBIA ROADINTERSECTIONS-Model-EXPORT.dwg RECEIVED DATE: NOVERMBER 28,2019.
EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY CONTOURSLEGEND
860
SITE BOUNDARY
PROPOSED DRAINAGE DITCH CENTRE
PROPOSED RIGHT-OF-WAY
AUGER HOLE LOCATION (GOLDER, 2019)
PROPOSED ROAD TOES
PROPOSED ROAD SHOULDER
13 January 2020 19115216-4000-006-R-Rev0
APPENDIX A
Important Information and
Limitations of this Report
1
IMPORTANT INFORMATION AND LIMITATIONS OF THIS REPORT
Standard of Care: Golder Associates Ltd. (Golder) has prepared this report in a manner consistent with that
level of care and skill ordinarily exercised by members of the engineering and science professions currently
practising under similar conditions in the jurisdiction in which the services are provided, subject to the time limits
and physical constraints applicable to this report. No other warranty, expressed or implied is made.
Basis and Use of the Report: This report has been prepared for the specific site, design objective, development
and purpose described to Golder by the Client. The factual data, interpretations and recommendations pertain to
a specific project as described in this report and are not applicable to any other project or site location. Any
change of site conditions, purpose, development plans or if the project is not initiated within eighteen months of
the date of the report may alter the validity of the report. Golder can not be responsible for use of this report, or
portions thereof, unless Golder is requested to review and, if necessary, revise the report.
The information, recommendations and opinions expressed in this report are for the sole benefit of the Client. No
other party may use or rely on this report or any portion thereof without Golder’s express written consent. If the
report was prepared to be included for a specific permit application process, then upon the reasonable request of
the client, Golder may authorize in writing the use of this report by the regulatory agency as an Approved User for
the specific and identified purpose of the applicable permit review process. Any other use of this report by others
is prohibited and is without responsibility to Golder. The report, all plans, data, drawings and other documents as
well as all electronic media prepared by Golder are considered its professional work product and shall remain the
copyright property of Golder, who authorizes only the Client and Approved Users to make copies of the report, but
only in such quantities as are reasonably necessary for the use of the report by those parties. The Client and
Approved Users may not give, lend, sell, or otherwise make available the report or any portion thereof to any
other party without the express written permission of Golder. The Client acknowledges that electronic media is
susceptible to unauthorized modification, deterioration and incompatibility and therefore the Client can not rely
upon the electronic media versions of Golder’s report or other work products.
The report is of a summary nature and is not intended to stand alone without reference to the instructions given to
Golder by the Client, communications between Golder and the Client, and to any other reports prepared by
Golder for the Client relative to the specific site described in the report. In order to properly understand the
suggestions, recommendations and opinions expressed in this report, reference must be made to the whole of the
report. Golder can not be responsible for use of portions of the report without reference to the entire report.
Unless otherwise stated, the suggestions, recommendations and opinions given in this report are intended only
for the guidance of the Client in the design of the specific project. The extent and detail of investigations,
including the number of test holes, necessary to determine all of the relevant conditions which may affect
construction costs would normally be greater than has been carried out for design purposes. Contractors bidding
on, or undertaking the work, should rely on their own investigations, as well as their own interpretations of the
factual data presented in the report, as to how subsurface conditions may affect their work, including but not
limited to proposed construction techniques, schedule, safety and equipment capabilities.
Soil, Rock and Groundwater Conditions: Classification and identification of soils, rocks, and geologic units
have been based on commonly accepted methods employed in the practice of geotechnical engineering and
related disciplines. Classification and identification of the type and condition of these materials or units involves
judgment, and boundaries between different soil, rock or geologic types or units may be transitional rather than
abrupt. Accordingly, Golder does not warrant or guarantee the exactness of the descriptions.
2
Special risks occur whenever engineering or related disciplines are applied to identify subsurface conditions and
even a comprehensive investigation, sampling and testing program may fail to detect all or certain subsurface
conditions. The environmental, geologic, geotechnical, geochemical and hydrogeologic conditions that Golder
interprets to exist between and beyond sampling points may differ from those that actually exist. In addition to soil
variability, fill of variable physical and chemical composition can be present over portions of the site or on
adjacent properties. The professional services retained for this project include only the geotechnical
aspects of the subsurface conditions at the site, unless otherwise specifically stated and identified in the
report. The presence or implication(s) of possible surface and/or subsurface contamination resulting from
previous activities or uses of the site and/or resulting from the introduction onto the site of materials from off-site
sources are outside the terms of reference for this project and have not been investigated or addressed.
Soil and groundwater conditions shown in the factual data and described in the report are the observed conditions
at the time of their determination or measurement. Unless otherwise noted, those conditions form the basis of the
recommendations in the report. Groundwater conditions may vary between and beyond reported locations and
can be affected by annual, seasonal and meteorological conditions. The condition of the soil, rock and
groundwater may be significantly altered by construction activities (traffic, excavation, groundwater level lowering,
pile driving, blasting, etc.) on the site or on adjacent sites. Excavation may expose the soils to changes due to
wetting, drying or frost. Unless otherwise indicated the soil must be protected from these changes during
construction.
Sample Disposal: Golder will dispose of all uncontaminated soil and/or rock samples 90 days following issue of
this report or, upon written request of the Client, will store uncontaminated samples and materials at the Client’s
expense. In the event that actual contaminated soils, fills or groundwater are encountered or are inferred to be
present, all contaminated samples shall remain the property and responsibility of the Client for proper disposal.
Follow-Up and Construction Services: All details of the design were not known at the time of submission of
Golder’s report. Golder should be retained to review the final design, project plans and documents prior to
construction, to confirm that they are consistent with the intent of Golder’s report.
During construction, Golder should be retained to perform sufficient and timely observations of encountered
conditions to confirm and document that the subsurface conditions do not materially differ from those interpreted
conditions considered in the preparation of Golder’s report and to confirm and document that construction
activities do not adversely affect the suggestions, recommendations and opinions contained in Golder’s report.
Adequate field review, observation and testing during construction are necessary for Golder to be able to provide
letters of assurance, in accordance with the requirements of many regulatory authorities. In cases where this
recommendation is not followed, Golder’s responsibility is limited to interpreting accurately the information
encountered at the borehole locations, at the time of their initial determination or measurement during the
preparation of the Report.
Changed Conditions and Drainage: Where conditions encountered at the site differ significantly from those
anticipated in this report, either due to natural variability of subsurface conditions or construction activities, it is a
condition of this report that Golder be notified of any changes and be provided with an opportunity to review or
revise the recommendations within this report. Recognition of changed soil and rock conditions requires
experience and it is recommended that Golder be employed to visit the site with sufficient frequency to detect if
conditions have changed significantly.
Drainage of subsurface water is commonly required either for temporary or permanent installations for the project.
Improper design or construction of drainage or dewatering can have serious consequences. Golder takes no
responsibility for the effects of drainage unless specifically involved in the detailed design and construction
monitoring of the system.
13 January 2020 19115216-4000-006-R-Rev0
APPENDIX B
Record of Boreholes
Sample Type 2. Soil Group (Organic Soils) 2. Soil Group continued (Fine and Coarse Grained Soils)
Soil Type/ Description Order
3. Description of Primary Components 7. Structure 11. Moisture
1. Classification
12. Compactness (Non-Cohesive)
4. Description of Secondary Components5. Description of Minor Components 12. Consistency (Cohesive)
6. Colour 8. Contamination if applicable; note staining and/or odour
9. Additional ObservationsSee note in Soil Type/Decsription order table
10. Behaviour
Non-Cohesive or Cohesive
Notes for Completion of Soil Field Logs
Fin
e G
rain
ed
So
ils
Silt
s an
d C
lays
LL
<50
Gra
vel a
nd
Gra
velly
Soi
lsS
and
and
S
andy
Soi
ls
Co
ars
e G
rain
ed S
oil
s
Silt
s an
d C
lays
LL
>5
0
CO
AR
SE
GR
AIN
ED
SO
ILS
FIN
E G
RA
INE
D S
OIL
S
OR
GA
NIC
SO
ILS
0.18m
1.45m
2.44m
5.18m
1
2
3A
4
5
67
71
75
AP
SM-GM
CI
CI
ASPHALT, 180 mm thick
SILTY SAND and GRAVEL, well graded,angular to sub-rounded gravel, darkbrown, non-cohesive, dry, inferredcompact, FILL - inferred base andsub-base gravels.
SILTY CLAY, light brown, cohesive,w~PL, firm, NATIVE - inferred.
SILTY CLAY, trace gravel, light brown,red-brown staining, cohesive, w~PL, firm.
Augerhole terminated at target depth.
Atterberg (Sa#3A):PL:23% LL:33%
Atterberg (Sa#5):PL:24% LL:37%Sieve (Sa#5)G:0% S:1% F:99%
Driller: Wayne
Drill Make/Model: Moble Drill Truck
CLA
SSIF
ICAT
ION
Location: Edgewater South, B.C.
Date(s) Drilled: 2019-11-17Project: Hwy95-Hwy93_Radium Hot Springs_BC
838
837
836
835
834
833
832
831
830
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
L#-LabSample
LegendSampleType:
A-Auger B-Becker
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Alignment:
SO
IL S
YM
BO
L
Drill Hole #: AH19-01A
RE
CO
VE
RY
(%
)
SA
MP
LE N
O
SA
MP
LE T
YP
E
SOILDESCRIPTION
Drilling Method: Auger
00
Page 1 of 1
DE
PT
H (
m)
DR
ILLI
NG
DE
TA
ILS
19115216/4000/4030
Reviewed by: GR
10
0
Final Depth of Hole: 5.2 mDepth to Top of Rock: N/A
COMMENTSTESTING
Drillers Estimate{G % S % F %}
SUMMARY LOG
Company: Geotech Drilling Ltd
V-Vane
T-ShelbyTube
G-Grab
W-Wash(mud return)
O-Odex(air rotary)
C-Core
S-SplitSpoon
Northing/Easting: 5615808 , 562275
Elevation: 839.0 m
Station/Offset:
Logged by: AM
ELE
VA
TIO
N (
m)
Golder Associates Ltd.Datum: NAD 83 UTM ZONE 11Prepared by:
MO
TI-
SO
IL-R
EV
3 1
9115
216-
4000
-403
0.G
PJ
MO
TI_
DA
TA
TE
MP
LAT
E_R
EV
3.G
DT
1/1
3/2
0
W%P20 40 60 80
W %W % L
SPT "N" (BLOWS/300 mm)
100 200 300 400 Pocket Penetrometer Shear Strength (kPa)
6
5
5
27.7
28.4
0.18m
1.45m
2.13m
3B 100
AP
SM-GM
CI
ASPHALT, 180 mm thick
SILTY SAND and GRAVEL, well graded,angular to sub-rounded gravel, darkbrown, non-cohesive, dry, inferredcompact, FILL - inferred base andsub-base gravels.
SILTY CLAY, light brown, cohesive,w~PL, firm, NATIVE - inferred.
Augerhole terminated at target depth.
Driller: Wayne
Drill Make/Model: Moble Drill Truck
CLA
SSIF
ICAT
ION
Location: Edgewater South, B.C.
Date(s) Drilled: 2019-11-17Project: Hwy95-Hwy93_Radium Hot Springs_BC
838
837
836
835
834
833
832
831
830
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
L#-LabSample
LegendSampleType:
A-Auger B-Becker
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Alignment:
SO
IL S
YM
BO
L
Drill Hole #: AH19-01B
RE
CO
VE
RY
(%
)
SA
MP
LE N
O
SA
MP
LE T
YP
E
SOILDESCRIPTION
Drilling Method: Auger
00
Page 1 of 1
DE
PT
H (
m)
DR
ILLI
NG
DE
TA
ILS
19115216/4000/4030
Reviewed by: GR
10
0
Final Depth of Hole: 2.1 mDepth to Top of Rock: N/A
COMMENTSTESTING
Drillers Estimate{G % S % F %}
SUMMARY LOG
Company: Geotech Drilling Ltd
V-Vane
T-ShelbyTube
G-Grab
W-Wash(mud return)
O-Odex(air rotary)
C-Core
S-SplitSpoon
Northing/Easting: 5615793 , 562264
Elevation: 839.0 m
Station/Offset:
Logged by: AM
ELE
VA
TIO
N (
m)
Golder Associates Ltd.Datum: NAD 83 UTM ZONE 11Prepared by:
MO
TI-
SO
IL-R
EV
3 1
9115
216-
4000
-403
0.G
PJ
MO
TI_
DA
TA
TE
MP
LAT
E_R
EV
3.G
DT
1/1
3/2
0
W%P20 40 60 80
W %W % L
SPT "N" (BLOWS/300 mm)
100 200 300 400 Pocket Penetrometer Shear Strength (kPa)
0.08m
0.76m
1.52m
3.05m
5.18m
1
2
3
4
5
92
83
92
AP
SM-GM
CI
CL
ML
ASPHALT, 80 mm thick
SILTY SAND and GRAVEL, well graded,sub-angular to sub-rounded gravel, darkbrown, non-cohesive, moist, inferredcompact, FILL - inferred base andsub-base gravels.
SILTY CLAY, some gravel, trace sand,brown, cohesive, w<PL, stiff, NATIVE -inferred.
SILTY CLAY, brown, mottled grey-brown,cohesive, w~PL, stiff.
SILT, grey-brown, cohesive, w~PL, stiff.
Augerhole terminated at target depth.
Atterberg (Sa#2):PL:21% LL:31%
Atterberg (Sa#3):PL:22% LL:29%
Driller: Wayne
Drill Make/Model: Moble Drill Truck
CLA
SSIF
ICAT
ION
Location: Edgewater South, B.C.
Date(s) Drilled: 2019-11-17Project: Hwy95-Hwy93_Radium Hot Springs_BC
836
835
834
833
832
831
830
829
828
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
L#-LabSample
LegendSampleType:
A-Auger B-Becker
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Alignment:
SO
IL S
YM
BO
L
Drill Hole #: AH19-02
RE
CO
VE
RY
(%
)
SA
MP
LE N
O
SA
MP
LE T
YP
E
SOILDESCRIPTION
Drilling Method: Auger
00
Page 1 of 1
DE
PT
H (
m)
DR
ILLI
NG
DE
TA
ILS
19115216/4000/4030
Reviewed by: GR
10
0
Final Depth of Hole: 5.2 mDepth to Top of Rock: N/A
COMMENTSTESTING
Drillers Estimate{G % S % F %}
SUMMARY LOG
Company: Geotech Drilling Ltd
V-Vane
T-ShelbyTube
G-Grab
W-Wash(mud return)
O-Odex(air rotary)
C-Core
S-SplitSpoon
Northing/Easting: 5615948 , 562242
Elevation: 837.0 m
Station/Offset:
Logged by: AM
ELE
VA
TIO
N (
m)
Golder Associates Ltd.Datum: NAD 83 UTM ZONE 11Prepared by:
MO
TI-
SO
IL-R
EV
3 1
9115
216-
4000
-403
0.G
PJ
MO
TI_
DA
TA
TE
MP
LAT
E_R
EV
3.G
DT
1/1
3/2
0
W%P20 40 60 80
W %W % L
SPT "N" (BLOWS/300 mm)
100 200 300 400 Pocket Penetrometer Shear Strength (kPa)
12
14
16
23
23.7
14.7
0.18m
1.22m
2.9m
3.96m
5.18m
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
83
100
AP
GM
ML
ML
CI
ASPHALT, 180 mm thick
sandy SILTY GRAVEL, well graded,angular to sub-angular gravel, darkbrown, non-cohesive, dry, inferredcompact, FILL - inferred base andsub-base gravels.
sandy CLAYEY SILT and GRAVEL, wellgraded sand, sub-angular to roundedgravel, brown, cohesive, w<PL to w~PL,stiff, NATIVE - inferred.
CLAYEY SILT, light brown, cohesive,w<PL to w~PL, stiff.
SILTY CLAY, light brown, cohesive,w~PL, stiff to very stiff.
Augerhole terminated at target depth.
Sieve (Sa#3)G:36% S:16% F:48%
Driller: Wayne
Drill Make/Model: Moble Drill Truck
CLA
SSIF
ICAT
ION
Location: Edgewater South, B.C.
Date(s) Drilled: 2019-11-17Project: Hwy95-Hwy93_Radium Hot Springs_BC
846
845
844
843
842
841
840
839
838
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
L#-LabSample
LegendSampleType:
A-Auger B-Becker
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Alignment:
SO
IL S
YM
BO
L
Drill Hole #: AH19-04
RE
CO
VE
RY
(%
)
SA
MP
LE N
O
SA
MP
LE T
YP
E
SOILDESCRIPTION
Drilling Method: Auger
00
Page 1 of 1
DE
PT
H (
m)
DR
ILLI
NG
DE
TA
ILS
19115216/4000/4030
Reviewed by: GR
10
0
Final Depth of Hole: 5.2 mDepth to Top of Rock: N/A
COMMENTSTESTING
Drillers Estimate{G % S % F %}
SUMMARY LOG
Company: Geotech Drilling Ltd
V-Vane
T-ShelbyTube
G-Grab
W-Wash(mud return)
O-Odex(air rotary)
C-Core
S-SplitSpoon
Northing/Easting: 5616033 , 562288
Elevation: 847.0 m
Station/Offset:
Logged by: AM
ELE
VA
TIO
N (
m)
Golder Associates Ltd.Datum: NAD 83 UTM ZONE 11Prepared by:
MO
TI-
SO
IL-R
EV
3 1
9115
216-
4000
-403
0.G
PJ
MO
TI_
DA
TA
TE
MP
LAT
E_R
EV
3.G
DT
1/1
3/2
0
W%P20 40 60 80
W %W % L
SPT "N" (BLOWS/300 mm)
100 200 300 400 Pocket Penetrometer Shear Strength (kPa)
13
12
22
13.8
0.25m
0.91m
1.37m
2.74m
4.57m
4.88m
5.18m
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
13
67
83
AP
SM
SM
ML
CI
CL-MLML
ASPHALT, 250 mm thick
gravelly SILTY SAND, well graded,angular to sub-rounded gravel, darkbrown, non-cohesive, dry, inferredcompact, FILL - inferred base andsub-base gravels.
gravelly SILTY SAND, well graded,sub-angular to rounded gravel, brown,non-cohesive, moist, inferred compact,NATIVE - inferred.
gravelly CLAYEY SILT, sub-angular torounded gravel, light brown, cohesive,w~PL, very stiff.
SILTY CLAY, some gravel, light brown,red-brown and dark brown bands, traceorganics, cohesive, w<PL to w~PL, stiff.
- some brown mottles
gravelly SILTY CLAY to CLAYEY SILT,some sand, light brown, cohesive, w~PL,very stiff.
sandy CLAYEY SILT, fine to mediumsand, brown, cohesive, w~PL, very stiff.
Augerhole terminated at target depth.
Driller: Wayne
Drill Make/Model: Moble Drill Truck
CLA
SSIF
ICAT
ION
Location: Edgewater North, B.C.
Date(s) Drilled: 2019-11-18Project: Hwy95-Hwy93_Radium Hot Springs_BC
876
875
874
873
872
871
870
869
868
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
L#-LabSample
LegendSampleType:
A-Auger B-Becker
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Alignment:
SO
IL S
YM
BO
L
Drill Hole #: AH19-05
RE
CO
VE
RY
(%
)
SA
MP
LE N
O
SA
MP
LE T
YP
E
SOILDESCRIPTION
Drilling Method: Auger
00
Page 1 of 1
DE
PT
H (
m)
DR
ILLI
NG
DE
TA
ILS
19115216/4000/4030
Reviewed by: GR
10
0
Final Depth of Hole: 5.2 mDepth to Top of Rock: N/A
COMMENTSTESTING
Drillers Estimate{G % S % F %}
SUMMARY LOG
Company: Geotech Drilling Ltd
V-Vane
T-ShelbyTube
G-Grab
W-Wash(mud return)
O-Odex(air rotary)
C-Core
S-SplitSpoon
Northing/Easting: 5617612 , 561294
Elevation: 877.0 m
Station/Offset:
Logged by: AM
ELE
VA
TIO
N (
m)
Golder Associates Ltd.Datum: NAD 83 UTM ZONE 11Prepared by:
MO
TI-
SO
IL-R
EV
3 1
9115
216-
4000
-403
0.G
PJ
MO
TI_
DA
TA
TE
MP
LAT
E_R
EV
3.G
DT
1/1
3/2
0
W%P20 40 60 80
W %W % L
SPT "N" (BLOWS/300 mm)
100 200 300 400 Pocket Penetrometer Shear Strength (kPa)
17
12
19
0.08m
0.91m
1.37m
3.05m
4.12m
4.42m
5.18m
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
83
79
79
AP
SM-GM
GM
CI
ML
CI
GW-SW
ASPHALT, 80 mm thick
SILTY SAND and GRAVEL, well graded,angular to sub-rounded gravel, darkbrown, non-cohesive, moist, inferredcompact, FILL - inferred base andsub-base gravels.
sandy SILTY GRAVEL, well graded,sub-angular to sub-rounded gravel,brown, non-cohesive, moist, inferredcompact, NATIVE - inferred.
SILTY CLAY, light brown mottled brownto red-brown, trace organics, cohesive,w<PL to w~PL, firm.
- some sand, trace gravel from 2.74 m
sandy SILT, fine to medium sand, lightbrown, cohesive, w~PL, interbedded withSILTY SAND, fine to medium, light brown,non-cohesive, moist; sandy SILT is soft tofirm, SILT SAND is very loose to loose.
SILTY CLAY, some sand, some gravel,light brown, cohesive, w~PL, soft to firm.
GRAVEL and SAND, some non-plasticfines, well graded, sub-angular tosub-rounded gravel, brown to grey-brown,with iron oxide staining, non-cohesive, dryto moist, dense.
Augerhole terminated at target depth.
Atterberg (Sa#3):PL:21% LL:33%
Atterberg (Sa#5):PL:15% LL:18%Sieve (Sa#5)G:0% S:34% F:66%
Sieve (Sa#7)G:48% S:44% F:8%
Driller: Wayne
Drill Make/Model: Moble Drill Truck
CLA
SSIF
ICAT
ION
Location: Edgewater North, B.C.
Date(s) Drilled: 2019-11-18Project: Hwy95-Hwy93_Radium Hot Springs_BC
852
851
850
849
848
847
846
845
844
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
L#-LabSample
LegendSampleType:
A-Auger B-Becker
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Alignment:
SO
IL S
YM
BO
L
Drill Hole #: AH19-06
RE
CO
VE
RY
(%
)
SA
MP
LE N
O
SA
MP
LE T
YP
E
SOILDESCRIPTION
Drilling Method: Auger
00
Page 1 of 1
DE
PT
H (
m)
DR
ILLI
NG
DE
TA
ILS
19115216/4000/4030
Reviewed by: GR
10
0
Final Depth of Hole: 5.2 mDepth to Top of Rock: N/A
COMMENTSTESTING
Drillers Estimate{G % S % F %}
SUMMARY LOG
Company: Geotech Drilling Ltd
V-Vane
T-ShelbyTube
G-Grab
W-Wash(mud return)
O-Odex(air rotary)
C-Core
S-SplitSpoon
Northing/Easting: 5617697 , 561307
Elevation: 853.0 m
Station/Offset:
Logged by: AM
ELE
VA
TIO
N (
m)
Golder Associates Ltd.Datum: NAD 83 UTM ZONE 11Prepared by:
MO
TI-
SO
IL-R
EV
3 1
9115
216-
4000
-403
0.G
PJ
MO
TI_
DA
TA
TE
MP
LAT
E_R
EV
3.G
DT
1/1
3/2
0
W%P20 40 60 80
W %W % L
SPT "N" (BLOWS/300 mm)
100 200 300 400 Pocket Penetrometer Shear Strength (kPa)
7
4
39
27.8
17.4
2
0.08m
0.91m
1.83m
2.44m
2.74m
1
2
3
4
88
AP
SM-GM
ML
SM-GM
ML
ASPHALT, 80 mm thick
SILTY SAND and GRAVEL, sub-angulargravel, brown, non-cohesive, dry, inferredcompact, FILL - inferred base andsub-base gravels.
CLAYEY SILT, some gravel, dark brownto orange-brown, cohesive, w~PL, stiff tovery stiff, NATIVE - inferred.
SILTY SAND and GRAVEL, well graded,sub-angular to sub-rounded gravel,brown, with iron oxide staining,non-cohesive, dry, compact.
gravelly CLAYEY SILT, well gradedgravel, sub-angular to sub-roundedgravel, brown to light brown, cohesive,w~PL, hard.
Augerhole terminated due to refusal inboulder/cobbles.
Atterberg (Sa#2):PL:30% LL:41%
Driller: Wayne
Drill Make/Model: Moble Drill Truck
CLA
SSIF
ICAT
ION
Location: Harrogate, B.C.
Date(s) Drilled: 2019-11-13Project: Hwy95-Hwy93_Radium Hot Springs_BC
798
797
796
795
794
793
792
791
790
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
L#-LabSample
LegendSampleType:
A-Auger B-Becker
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Alignment:
SO
IL S
YM
BO
L
Drill Hole #: AH19-07
RE
CO
VE
RY
(%
)
SA
MP
LE N
O
SA
MP
LE T
YP
E
SOILDESCRIPTION
Drilling Method: Auger
00
Page 1 of 1
DE
PT
H (
m)
DR
ILLI
NG
DE
TA
ILS
19115216/4000/4030
Reviewed by: GR
10
0
Final Depth of Hole: 2.7 mDepth to Top of Rock: N/A
COMMENTSTESTING
Drillers Estimate{G % S % F %}
SUMMARY LOG
Company: Geotech Drilling Ltd
V-Vane
T-ShelbyTube
G-Grab
W-Wash(mud return)
O-Odex(air rotary)
C-Core
S-SplitSpoon
Northing/Easting: 5648164 , 538021
Elevation: 799.0 m
Station/Offset:
Logged by: AM
ELE
VA
TIO
N (
m)
Golder Associates Ltd.Datum: NAD 83 UTM ZONE 11Prepared by:
MO
TI-
SO
IL-R
EV
3 1
9115
216-
4000
-403
0.G
PJ
MO
TI_
DA
TA
TE
MP
LAT
E_R
EV
3.G
DT
1/1
3/2
0
W%P20 40 60 80
W %W % L
SPT "N" (BLOWS/300 mm)
100 200 300 400 Pocket Penetrometer Shear Strength (kPa)
23
30
0.18m
0.76m
2.74m
3.15m
3.96m
4.42m
5.18m
1
2
3
4
5
6
71
79
AP
SW-GW
SW-GW
ML
SM-GM
GC
ML
ASPHALT, 180 mm thick
SAND and GRAVEL, trace non-plasticfines, fine to medium sand, well graded,sub-angular to sub-rounded gravel,brown, non-cohesive, dry, inferredcompact, FILL - inferred base andsub-base gravels.
SAND and GRAVEL, some non-plasticfines, well graded, sub-angular tosub-rounded gravel, brown,non-cohesive, dry, compact to dense,FILL.
CLAYEY SILT, some gravel, light brown,cohesive, w~PL, very stiff, NATIVE -inferred.
SILTY SAND and GRAVEL, well graded,sub-angular to sub-rounded gravel,brown, with iron oxide staining,non-cohesive, dry, compact.
CLAYEY GRAVEL, well graded,sub-rounded to rounded, brown,non-cohesive, moist, compact.
CLAYEY SILT, light brown, cohesive,w~PL, firm.
Augerhole terminated at target depth.
Sieve (Sa#2)G:44% S:47% F:9%
Driller: Wayne
Drill Make/Model: Moble Drill Truck
CLA
SSIF
ICAT
ION
Location: Harrogate, B.C.
Date(s) Drilled: 2019-11-13Project: Hwy95-Hwy93_Radium Hot Springs_BC
811
810
809
808
807
806
805
804
803
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
L#-LabSample
LegendSampleType:
A-Auger B-Becker
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Alignment:
SO
IL S
YM
BO
L
Drill Hole #: AH19-08
RE
CO
VE
RY
(%
)
SA
MP
LE N
O
SA
MP
LE T
YP
E
SOILDESCRIPTION
Drilling Method: Auger
00
Page 1 of 1
DE
PT
H (
m)
DR
ILLI
NG
DE
TA
ILS
19115216/4000/4030
Reviewed by: GR
10
0
Final Depth of Hole: 5.2 mDepth to Top of Rock: N/A
COMMENTSTESTING
Drillers Estimate{G % S % F %}
SUMMARY LOG
Company: Geotech Drilling Ltd
V-Vane
T-ShelbyTube
G-Grab
W-Wash(mud return)
O-Odex(air rotary)
C-Core
S-SplitSpoon
Northing/Easting: 5648315 , 537929
Elevation: 812.0 m
Station/Offset:
Logged by: AM
ELE
VA
TIO
N (
m)
Golder Associates Ltd.Datum: NAD 83 UTM ZONE 11Prepared by:
MO
TI-
SO
IL-R
EV
3 1
9115
216-
4000
-403
0.G
PJ
MO
TI_
DA
TA
TE
MP
LAT
E_R
EV
3.G
DT
1/1
3/2
0
W%P20 40 60 80
W %W % L
SPT "N" (BLOWS/300 mm)
100 200 300 400 Pocket Penetrometer Shear Strength (kPa)
16
18
7
4
0.61m
2.44m
3.05m
3.96m
1
2
3
4
5
88
71
SM-GM
SW-GW
GM
SM-GM
SILTY SAND and GRAVEL, well graded,angular to sub-angular gravel, darkbrown, trace rootlets, non-cohesive, dry,inferred dense, FILL - inferred.
SAND and GRAVEL, some non-plasticfines, well graded, angular tosub-rounded gravel, brown,non-cohesive, dry to moist, very dense,NATIVE - inferred.
sandy SILTY GRAVEL, well graded,sub-angular to sub-rounded gravel,brown, non-cohesive, moist, very dense.
SILTY SAND and GRAVEL, well graded,sub-angular to rounded gravel, brown togrey-brown, with iron oxide staining,non-cohesive, dry to moist, dense.
Augerhole terminated at 3.96 m due todifficult drilling conditions.
Sieve (Sa#3)G:38% S:50% F:12%
Driller: Wayne
Drill Make/Model: Moble Drill Truck
CLA
SSIF
ICAT
ION
Location: Harrogate, B.C.
Date(s) Drilled: 2019-11-14Project: Hwy95-Hwy93_Radium Hot Springs_BC
798
797
796
795
794
793
792
791
790
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
L#-LabSample
LegendSampleType:
A-Auger B-Becker
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Alignment:
SO
IL S
YM
BO
L
Drill Hole #: AH19-09
RE
CO
VE
RY
(%
)
SA
MP
LE N
O
SA
MP
LE T
YP
E
SOILDESCRIPTION
Drilling Method: Auger
00
Page 1 of 1
DE
PT
H (
m)
DR
ILLI
NG
DE
TA
ILS
19115216/4000/4030
Reviewed by: GR
10
0
Final Depth of Hole: 4.0 mDepth to Top of Rock: N/A
COMMENTSTESTING
Drillers Estimate{G % S % F %}
SUMMARY LOG
Company: Geotech Drilling Ltd
V-Vane
T-ShelbyTube
G-Grab
W-Wash(mud return)
O-Odex(air rotary)
C-Core
S-SplitSpoon
Northing/Easting: 5648401 , 537903
Elevation: 799.0 m
Station/Offset:
Logged by: AM
ELE
VA
TIO
N (
m)
Golder Associates Ltd.Datum: NAD 83 UTM ZONE 11Prepared by:
MO
TI-
SO
IL-R
EV
3 1
9115
216-
4000
-403
0.G
PJ
MO
TI_
DA
TA
TE
MP
LAT
E_R
EV
3.G
DT
1/1
3/2
0
W%P20 40 60 80
W %W % L
SPT "N" (BLOWS/300 mm)
100 200 300 400 Pocket Penetrometer Shear Strength (kPa)
77
31
2.8
0.08m
1.07m
2.9m
3.96m
4.65m
5.18m
1
2
3
4
5
6
79
63
88
AP
SM
SM
SM
SM
ML
ASPHALT, 80 mm thick
gravelly SILTY SAND, well graded,angular to sub-rounded gravel, darkbrown, non-cohesive, dry, inferredcompact, FILL - inferred base andsub-base gravels.
gravelly SILTY SAND, well graded,sub-angular to rounded gravel, brown,with iron oxide staining, non-cohesive, dryto moist, dense, NATIVE - inferred.
- cobbles and boulders between 2.13 mand 2.44 m
gravelly SILTY SAND, well graded,sub-angular to rounded gravel, brown,with iron oxide staining, non-cohesive,wet, compact.
SILTY SAND, some gravel, well graded,brown to grey-brown, non-cohesive, wet,compact.
CLAYEY SILT, light brown to brown, withiron oxide staining, cohesive, w>PL, verystiff. - grey, no staining from 4.93 m to EOH
Augerhole terminated at target depth.
Driller: Wayne
Drill Make/Model: Moble Drill Truck
CLA
SSIF
ICAT
ION
Location: Harrogate, B.C.
Date(s) Drilled: 2019-11-16Project: Hwy95-Hwy93_Radium Hot Springs_BC
796
795
794
793
792
791
790
789
788
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
L#-LabSample
LegendSampleType:
A-Auger B-Becker
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Alignment:
SO
IL S
YM
BO
L
Drill Hole #: AH19-10
RE
CO
VE
RY
(%
)
SA
MP
LE N
O
SA
MP
LE T
YP
E
SOILDESCRIPTION
Drilling Method: Auger
00
Page 1 of 1
DE
PT
H (
m)
DR
ILLI
NG
DE
TA
ILS
19115216/4000/4030
Reviewed by: GR
10
0
Final Depth of Hole: 5.2 mDepth to Top of Rock: N/A
COMMENTSTESTING
Drillers Estimate{G % S % F %}
SUMMARY LOG
Company: Geotech Drilling Ltd
V-Vane
T-ShelbyTube
G-Grab
W-Wash(mud return)
O-Odex(air rotary)
C-Core
S-SplitSpoon
Northing/Easting: 5648431 , 537828
Elevation: 797.0 m
Station/Offset:
Logged by: AM
ELE
VA
TIO
N (
m)
Golder Associates Ltd.Datum: NAD 83 UTM ZONE 11Prepared by:
MO
TI-
SO
IL-R
EV
3 1
9115
216-
4000
-403
0.G
PJ
MO
TI_
DA
TA
TE
MP
LAT
E_R
EV
3.G
DT
1/1
3/2
0
W%P20 40 60 80
W %W % L
SPT "N" (BLOWS/300 mm)
100 200 300 400 Pocket Penetrometer Shear Strength (kPa)
31
19
23
2.9m
2.2
0.08m
0.91m
3.05m
6.1m
6.71m
1
2
3
4
5
6
58
83
58
42
AP
SM-GM
SM
SM-GM
SM
ASPHALT, 80 mm thick
SILTY SAND and GRAVEL, well graded,angular to sub-rounded gravel, darkbrown, non-cohesive, dry, inferredcompact, FILL - inferred base andsub-base gravels.
gravelly SILTY SAND, well graded,sub-angular to rounded gravel, brown,with iron oxide staining, with cobbles,non-cohesive, dry to moist, compact,NATIVE - inferred.
SILTY SAND and GRAVEL, well graded,sub-angular to rounded gravel, brown,with iron oxide staining, with cobbles andboulders, non-cohesive, wet, dense.
gravelly SILTY SAND, well graded,sub-angular to sub-rounded gravel,brown, non-cohesive, wet, compact.
Augerhole terminated at target depth.
Driller: Wayne
Drill Make/Model: Moble Drill Truck
CLA
SSIF
ICAT
ION
Location: Harrogate, B.C.
Date(s) Drilled: 2019-11-16Project: Hwy95-Hwy93_Radium Hot Springs_BC
791
790
789
788
787
786
785
784
783
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
L#-LabSample
LegendSampleType:
A-Auger B-Becker
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Alignment:
SO
IL S
YM
BO
L
Drill Hole #: AH19-11
RE
CO
VE
RY
(%
)
SA
MP
LE N
O
SA
MP
LE T
YP
E
SOILDESCRIPTION
Drilling Method: Auger
00
Page 1 of 1
DE
PT
H (
m)
DR
ILLI
NG
DE
TA
ILS
19115216/4000/4030
Reviewed by: GR
10
0
Final Depth of Hole: 6.7 mDepth to Top of Rock: N/A
COMMENTSTESTING
Drillers Estimate{G % S % F %}
SUMMARY LOG
Company: Geotech Drilling Ltd
V-Vane
T-ShelbyTube
G-Grab
W-Wash(mud return)
O-Odex(air rotary)
C-Core
S-SplitSpoon
Northing/Easting: 5648513 , 537767
Elevation: 792.0 m
Station/Offset:
Logged by: AM
ELE
VA
TIO
N (
m)
Golder Associates Ltd.Datum: NAD 83 UTM ZONE 11Prepared by:
MO
TI-
SO
IL-R
EV
3 1
9115
216-
4000
-403
0.G
PJ
MO
TI_
DA
TA
TE
MP
LAT
E_R
EV
3.G
DT
1/1
3/2
0
W%P20 40 60 80
W %W % L
SPT "N" (BLOWS/300 mm)
100 200 300 400 Pocket Penetrometer Shear Strength (kPa)
15
41
34
28
3.0m
0.08m
0.91m
2.9m
5.18m
1
2
3
4
5
75
71
75
AP
GW-SW
SW-GW
SM
ASPHALT, 80 mm thick
GRAVEL and SAND, trace non-plasticfines, well-graded, angular to sub-angulargravel, dark brown, non-cohesive, dry,inferred compact, FILL - inferred baseand sub-base gravels.
SAND and GRAVEL, some non-plasticfines, well graded, sub-angular torounded gravel, brown, with iron oxidestaining, non-cohesive, dry to moist,compact, NATIVE - inferred.
gravelly SILTY SAND, well graded,sub-angular to rounded gravel, brown,with iron oxide staining, with cobbles andboulders, non-cohesive, moist to wet,compact.
Augerhole terminated at target depth.
Sieve (Sa#1)G:59% S:37% F:3%
Sieve (Sa#3)G:44% S:47% F:9%
Driller: Wayne
Drill Make/Model: Moble Drill Truck
CLA
SSIF
ICAT
ION
Location: Harrogate, B.C.
Date(s) Drilled: 2019-11-16Project: Hwy95-Hwy93_Radium Hot Springs_BC
783
782
781
780
779
778
777
776
775
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
L#-LabSample
LegendSampleType:
A-Auger B-Becker
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Alignment:
SO
IL S
YM
BO
L
Drill Hole #: AH19-12
RE
CO
VE
RY
(%
)
SA
MP
LE N
O
SA
MP
LE T
YP
E
SOILDESCRIPTION
Drilling Method: Auger
00
Page 1 of 1
DE
PT
H (
m)
DR
ILLI
NG
DE
TA
ILS
19115216/4000/4030
Reviewed by: GR
10
0
Final Depth of Hole: 5.2 mDepth to Top of Rock: N/A
COMMENTSTESTING
Drillers Estimate{G % S % F %}
SUMMARY LOG
Company: Geotech Drilling Ltd
V-Vane
T-ShelbyTube
G-Grab
W-Wash(mud return)
O-Odex(air rotary)
C-Core
S-SplitSpoon
Northing/Easting: 5648636 , 537676
Elevation: 784.0 m
Station/Offset:
Logged by: AM
ELE
VA
TIO
N (
m)
Golder Associates Ltd.Datum: NAD 83 UTM ZONE 11Prepared by:
MO
TI-
SO
IL-R
EV
3 1
9115
216-
4000
-403
0.G
PJ
MO
TI_
DA
TA
TE
MP
LAT
E_R
EV
3.G
DT
1/1
3/2
0
W%P20 40 60 80
W %W % L
SPT "N" (BLOWS/300 mm)
100 200 300 400 Pocket Penetrometer Shear Strength (kPa)
27
17
13
2.7
3.4
0.08m
0.91m
3.05m
4.57m
5.49m
6.71m
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
63
58
75
88
AP
SM
SM
SM
SM
CL-ML
ASPHALT, 80 mm thick
gravelly SILTY SAND, well graded,angular to sub-angular gravel, darkbrown, non-cohesive, dry, inferredcompact, FILL - inferred base andsub-base gravels.
gravelly SILTY SAND, well graded,sub-angular to rounded gravel, brown,non-cohesive, dry to moist, compact, FILL- inferred.
gravelly SILTY SAND, well graded,sub-angular to rounded gravel, brown,trace organics, non-cohesive, moist,compact, NATIVE - inferred.
gravelly SILTY SAND, well graded,sub-angular to rounded gravel, brown togrey-brown, with iron oxide staining, traceorganics, non-cohesive, wet, compact.
SILTY CLAY to CLAYEY SILT, lightbrown, cohesive, w>PL, firm.
Augerhole terminated at target depth.
Atterberg (Sa#7):PL:21% LL:27%
Driller: Wayne
Drill Make/Model: Moble Drill Truck
CLA
SSIF
ICAT
ION
Location: Harrogate, B.C.
Date(s) Drilled: 2019-11-19Project: Hwy95-Hwy93_Radium Hot Springs_BC
789
788
787
786
785
784
783
782
781
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
L#-LabSample
LegendSampleType:
A-Auger B-Becker
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Alignment:
SO
IL S
YM
BO
L
Drill Hole #: AH19-13
RE
CO
VE
RY
(%
)
SA
MP
LE N
O
SA
MP
LE T
YP
E
SOILDESCRIPTION
Drilling Method: Auger
00
Page 1 of 1
DE
PT
H (
m)
DR
ILLI
NG
DE
TA
ILS
19115216/4000/4030
Reviewed by: GR
10
0
Final Depth of Hole: 6.7 mDepth to Top of Rock: N/A
COMMENTSTESTING
Drillers Estimate{G % S % F %}
SUMMARY LOG
Company: Geotech Drilling Ltd
V-Vane
T-ShelbyTube
G-Grab
W-Wash(mud return)
O-Odex(air rotary)
C-Core
S-SplitSpoon
Northing/Easting: 5648707 , 537622
Elevation: 790.0 m
Station/Offset:
Logged by: AM
ELE
VA
TIO
N (
m)
Golder Associates Ltd.Datum: NAD 83 UTM ZONE 11Prepared by:
MO
TI-
SO
IL-R
EV
3 1
9115
216-
4000
-403
0.G
PJ
MO
TI_
DA
TA
TE
MP
LAT
E_R
EV
3.G
DT
1/1
3/2
0
W%P20 40 60 80
W %W % L
SPT "N" (BLOWS/300 mm)
100 200 300 400 Pocket Penetrometer Shear Strength (kPa)
16
13
23
7
4.8m10.4
27
13 January 2020 19115216-4000-006-R-Rev0
APPENDIX C
Laboratory Testing Results
AH19-01A SA3A 1.52 2.13 27.7
AH19-01A SA5 4.57 5.18 28.4
AH19-02 SA2 0.91 1.22 23.0
AH19-02 SA3 1.52 2.13 23.7
AH19-02 SA4 3.05 3.66 14.7
AH19-04 SA3 1.52 2.13 13.8
AH19-06 SA3 1.52 2.13 27.8
AH19-06 SA5 3.05 3.66 17.4
AH19-06 SA7 4.57 5.18 2.0
AH19-07 SA2 0.91 1.52 30.0
AH19-08 SA2 0.91 1.52 4.0
AH19-09 SA3 1.52 2.13 2.8
AH19-10 SA3 1.52 2.13 2.2
AH19-12 SA1 0.08 0.30 2.7
AH19-12 SA3 1.52 2.13 3.4
AH19-13 SA6 4.57 5.18 10.4
AH19-13 SA7 6.10 6.71 27.0
SampleLocation
WaterContent
(%)Depth
(m)Bottom
(m)
Depth IntervalSample
No.Specimen
No.
Sheet 1 of 1
ASTM D 2216
WATER CONTENT DETERMINATION
SJ 12/9/2019
Nat
iona
l IM
Ser
ver:
GIN
T_G
AL_
NA
TIO
NA
LIM
Uni
que
Pro
ject
ID: O
utpu
t For
m:_
LAB
_WA
TE
R C
ON
TE
NT
(R
EP
OR
T)
2018
SJo
hn 9
/1/2
0
Lab Schedule No.:
19115216 Phase: 4000 Task: 4020
Project:
Location:
Highway 95/93 Improvements
Client: Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure
Project No.:
Checked Date
300 - 3811 North Fraser Way, Burnaby, BC V5J 5J2 CANADATel: +1 (604) 412 6899 Fax: +1 (604) 412 6816 www.golder.com
Golder Associates Ltd.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
12/9/2019
Sample / SpecimenNumber
1.52 2.13
Bottom(m)
PercentPassing
#40 Sieve(%)
Sym.
ND
LIQUID LIMIT, PLASTIC LIMIT ANDPLASTICITY INDEX OF SOILS
Depth Interval (m):
LiquidLimit
PlasticLimit
PlasticityIndex
NaturalWater Content
(%)
LiquidityIndex
NP - NON-PLASTIC RESULT ND - NOT DETERMINED
1.52 to 2.13
AH19-01A 27.733 23 0.5 10.0
PLASTICITY CHART
Pla
stic
ity
Ind
ex
Liquid Limit
Depth(m)
SampleLocation
RG 12/2/2019 SJ
Note: The test data given herein pertain to the sample provided only. This report constitutes a testing service only.
SA3A
ASTM D 4318
Nat
iona
l IM
Ser
ver:
GIN
T_G
AL_
NA
TIO
NA
LIM
Uni
que
Pro
ject
ID: O
utpu
t For
m:_
LAB
AT
TE
RB
ER
G C
AS
AG
RA
ND
E (
SIN
GLE
) 20
18 S
John
9/1
/20
ID: AH19-01A
Lab Schedule No.:
Sample No.: SA3A
N/A
Preparation Method:Test Method: A-Multi Point
Other Remarks:
Air Dried
19115216 Phase: 4000 Task: 4020
Project:
Location:
Highway 95/93 Improvements
Client: Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure
Project No.:
DateTech Checked Date
300 - 3811 North Fraser Way, Burnaby, BC V5J 5J2 CANADATel: +1 (604) 412 6899 Fax: +1 (604) 412 6816 www.golder.com
Golder Associates Ltd.
SILT (ML)SILTY CLAY-CLAYEY SILT (CL-ML) CLAYEY SILT (ML)
ORGANIC SILT (OL)
A-Line
CLAYEY SILT (MH)ORGANIC SILT (OH)
CLAY(CH)
SILTY CLAY(CI)
SILTY CLAY(CL)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
12/9/2019
Sample / SpecimenNumber
4.57 5.18
Bottom(m)
PercentPassing
#40 Sieve(%)
Sym.
100
LIQUID LIMIT, PLASTIC LIMIT ANDPLASTICITY INDEX OF SOILS
Depth Interval (m):
LiquidLimit
PlasticLimit
PlasticityIndex
NaturalWater Content
(%)
LiquidityIndex
NP - NON-PLASTIC RESULT ND - NOT DETERMINED
4.57 to 5.18
AH19-01A 28.437 24 0.3 13.0
PLASTICITY CHART
Pla
stic
ity
Ind
ex
Liquid Limit
Depth(m)
SampleLocation
RG 12/2/2019 SJ
Note: The test data given herein pertain to the sample provided only. This report constitutes a testing service only.
SA5
ASTM D 4318
Nat
iona
l IM
Ser
ver:
GIN
T_G
AL_
NA
TIO
NA
LIM
Uni
que
Pro
ject
ID: O
utpu
t For
m:_
LAB
AT
TE
RB
ER
G C
AS
AG
RA
ND
E (
SIN
GLE
) 20
18 S
John
9/1
/20
ID: AH19-01A
Lab Schedule No.:
Sample No.: SA5
N/A
Preparation Method:Test Method: A-Multi Point
Other Remarks:
Air Dried
19115216 Phase: 4000 Task: 4020
Project:
Location:
Highway 95/93 Improvements
Client: Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure
Project No.:
DateTech Checked Date
300 - 3811 North Fraser Way, Burnaby, BC V5J 5J2 CANADATel: +1 (604) 412 6899 Fax: +1 (604) 412 6816 www.golder.com
Golder Associates Ltd.
SILT (ML)SILTY CLAY-CLAYEY SILT (CL-ML) CLAYEY SILT (ML)
ORGANIC SILT (OL)
A-Line
CLAYEY SILT (MH)ORGANIC SILT (OH)
CLAY(CH)
SILTY CLAY(CI)
SILTY CLAY(CL)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
12/9/2019
Sample / SpecimenNumber
0.91 1.22
Bottom(m)
PercentPassing
#40 Sieve(%)
Sym.
ND
LIQUID LIMIT, PLASTIC LIMIT ANDPLASTICITY INDEX OF SOILS
Depth Interval (m):
LiquidLimit
PlasticLimit
PlasticityIndex
NaturalWater Content
(%)
LiquidityIndex
NP - NON-PLASTIC RESULT ND - NOT DETERMINED
0.91 to 1.22
AH19-02 23.031 21 0.2 10.0
PLASTICITY CHART
Pla
stic
ity
Ind
ex
Liquid Limit
Depth(m)
SampleLocation
RG 12/2/2019 SJ
Note: The test data given herein pertain to the sample provided only. This report constitutes a testing service only.
SA2
ASTM D 4318
Nat
iona
l IM
Ser
ver:
GIN
T_G
AL_
NA
TIO
NA
LIM
Uni
que
Pro
ject
ID: O
utpu
t For
m:_
LAB
AT
TE
RB
ER
G C
AS
AG
RA
ND
E (
SIN
GLE
) 20
18 S
John
9/1
2/19
ID: AH19-02
Lab Schedule No.:
Sample No.: SA2
N/A
Preparation Method:Test Method: A-Multi Point
Other Remarks:
Air Dried
19115216 Phase: 4000 Task: 4020
Project:
Location:
Highway 95/93 Improvements
Client: Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure
Project No.:
DateTech Checked Date
300 - 3811 North Fraser Way, Burnaby, BC V5J 5J2 CANADATel: +1 (604) 412 6899 Fax: +1 (604) 412 6816 www.golder.com
Golder Associates Ltd.
SILT (ML)SILTY CLAY-CLAYEY SILT (CL-ML) CLAYEY SILT (ML)
ORGANIC SILT (OL)
A-Line
CLAYEY SILT (MH)ORGANIC SILT (OH)
CLAY(CH)
SILTY CLAY(CI)
SILTY CLAY(CL)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
12/9/2019
Sample / SpecimenNumber
1.52 2.13
Bottom(m)
PercentPassing
#40 Sieve(%)
Sym.
ND
LIQUID LIMIT, PLASTIC LIMIT ANDPLASTICITY INDEX OF SOILS
Depth Interval (m):
LiquidLimit
PlasticLimit
PlasticityIndex
NaturalWater Content
(%)
LiquidityIndex
NP - NON-PLASTIC RESULT ND - NOT DETERMINED
1.52 to 2.13
AH19-02 23.729 22 0.2 7.0
PLASTICITY CHART
Pla
stic
ity
Ind
ex
Liquid Limit
Depth(m)
SampleLocation
RG 11/29/2019 SJ
Note: The test data given herein pertain to the sample provided only. This report constitutes a testing service only.
SA3
ASTM D 4318
Nat
iona
l IM
Ser
ver:
GIN
T_G
AL_
NA
TIO
NA
LIM
Uni
que
Pro
ject
ID: O
utpu
t For
m:_
LAB
AT
TE
RB
ER
G C
AS
AG
RA
ND
E (
SIN
GLE
) 20
18 S
John
9/1
2/19
ID: AH19-02
Lab Schedule No.:
Sample No.: SA3
N/A
Preparation Method:Test Method: A-Multi Point
Other Remarks:
Wet
19115216 Phase: 4000 Task: 4020
Project:
Location:
Highway 95/93 Improvements
Client: Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure
Project No.:
DateTech Checked Date
300 - 3811 North Fraser Way, Burnaby, BC V5J 5J2 CANADATel: +1 (604) 412 6899 Fax: +1 (604) 412 6816 www.golder.com
Golder Associates Ltd.
SILT (ML)SILTY CLAY-CLAYEY SILT (CL-ML) CLAYEY SILT (ML)
ORGANIC SILT (OL)
A-Line
CLAYEY SILT (MH)ORGANIC SILT (OH)
CLAY(CH)
SILTY CLAY(CI)
SILTY CLAY(CL)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
12/9/2019
Sample / SpecimenNumber
3.05 3.66
Bottom(m)
PercentPassing
#40 Sieve(%)
Sym.
ND
LIQUID LIMIT, PLASTIC LIMIT ANDPLASTICITY INDEX OF SOILS
Depth Interval (m):
LiquidLimit
PlasticLimit
PlasticityIndex
NaturalWater Content
(%)
LiquidityIndex
NP - NON-PLASTIC RESULT ND - NOT DETERMINED
3.05 to 3.66
AH19-02 14.7NP NP NPNP
PLASTICITY CHART
Pla
stic
ity
Ind
ex
Liquid Limit
Depth(m)
SampleLocation
RG 12/2/2019 SJ
Note: The test data given herein pertain to the sample provided only. This report constitutes a testing service only.
SA4
ASTM D 4318
Nat
iona
l IM
Ser
ver:
GIN
T_G
AL_
NA
TIO
NA
LIM
Uni
que
Pro
ject
ID: O
utpu
t For
m:_
LAB
AT
TE
RB
ER
G C
AS
AG
RA
ND
E (
SIN
GLE
) 20
18 S
John
9/1
2/19
ID: AH19-02
Lab Schedule No.:
Sample No.: SA4
N/A
Preparation Method:Test Method: A-Multi Point
Other Remarks:
Wet
19115216 Phase: 4000 Task: 4020
Project:
Location:
Highway 95/93 Improvements
Client: Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure
Project No.:
DateTech Checked Date
300 - 3811 North Fraser Way, Burnaby, BC V5J 5J2 CANADATel: +1 (604) 412 6899 Fax: +1 (604) 412 6816 www.golder.com
Golder Associates Ltd.
SILT (ML)SILTY CLAY-CLAYEY SILT (CL-ML) CLAYEY SILT (ML)
ORGANIC SILT (OL)
A-Line
CLAYEY SILT (MH)ORGANIC SILT (OH)
CLAY(CH)
SILTY CLAY(CI)
SILTY CLAY(CL)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
12/9/2019
Sample / SpecimenNumber
1.52 2.13
Bottom(m)
PercentPassing
#40 Sieve(%)
Sym.
ND
LIQUID LIMIT, PLASTIC LIMIT ANDPLASTICITY INDEX OF SOILS
Depth Interval (m):
LiquidLimit
PlasticLimit
PlasticityIndex
NaturalWater Content
(%)
LiquidityIndex
NP - NON-PLASTIC RESULT ND - NOT DETERMINED
1.52 to 2.13
AH19-06 27.833 21 0.6 12.0
PLASTICITY CHART
Pla
stic
ity
Ind
ex
Liquid Limit
Depth(m)
SampleLocation
RG/FF 12/4/2019 SJ
Note: The test data given herein pertain to the sample provided only. This report constitutes a testing service only.
SA3
ASTM D 4318
Nat
iona
l IM
Ser
ver:
GIN
T_G
AL_
NA
TIO
NA
LIM
Uni
que
Pro
ject
ID: O
utpu
t For
m:_
LAB
AT
TE
RB
ER
G C
AS
AG
RA
ND
E (
SIN
GLE
) 20
18 S
John
9/1
2/19
ID: AH19-06
Lab Schedule No.:
Sample No.: SA3
N/A
Preparation Method:Test Method: A-Multi Point
Other Remarks:
Wet
19115216 Phase: 4000 Task: 4020
Project:
Location:
Highway 95/93 Improvements
Client: Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure
Project No.:
DateTech Checked Date
300 - 3811 North Fraser Way, Burnaby, BC V5J 5J2 CANADATel: +1 (604) 412 6899 Fax: +1 (604) 412 6816 www.golder.com
Golder Associates Ltd.
SILT (ML)SILTY CLAY-CLAYEY SILT (CL-ML) CLAYEY SILT (ML)
ORGANIC SILT (OL)
A-Line
CLAYEY SILT (MH)ORGANIC SILT (OH)
CLAY(CH)
SILTY CLAY(CI)
SILTY CLAY(CL)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
12/9/2019
Sample / SpecimenNumber
3.05 3.66
Bottom(m)
PercentPassing
#40 Sieve(%)
Sym.
91
LIQUID LIMIT, PLASTIC LIMIT ANDPLASTICITY INDEX OF SOILS
Depth Interval (m):
LiquidLimit
PlasticLimit
PlasticityIndex
NaturalWater Content
(%)
LiquidityIndex
NP - NON-PLASTIC RESULT ND - NOT DETERMINED
3.05 to 3.66
AH19-06 17.418 15 0.8 3.0
PLASTICITY CHART
Pla
stic
ity
Ind
ex
Liquid Limit
Depth(m)
SampleLocation
RG/FF 11/28/2019 SJ
Note: The test data given herein pertain to the sample provided only. This report constitutes a testing service only.
SA5
ASTM D 4318
Nat
iona
l IM
Ser
ver:
GIN
T_G
AL_
NA
TIO
NA
LIM
Uni
que
Pro
ject
ID: O
utpu
t For
m:_
LAB
AT
TE
RB
ER
G C
AS
AG
RA
ND
E (
SIN
GLE
) 20
18 S
John
9/1
2/19
ID: AH19-06
Lab Schedule No.:
Sample No.: SA5
N/A
Preparation Method:Test Method: A-Multi Point
Other Remarks:
Air Dried
19115216 Phase: 4000 Task: 4020
Project:
Location:
Highway 95/93 Improvements
Client: Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure
Project No.:
DateTech Checked Date
300 - 3811 North Fraser Way, Burnaby, BC V5J 5J2 CANADATel: +1 (604) 412 6899 Fax: +1 (604) 412 6816 www.golder.com
Golder Associates Ltd.
SILT (ML)SILTY CLAY-CLAYEY SILT (CL-ML) CLAYEY SILT (ML)
ORGANIC SILT (OL)
A-Line
CLAYEY SILT (MH)ORGANIC SILT (OH)
CLAY(CH)
SILTY CLAY(CI)
SILTY CLAY(CL)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
12/9/2019
Sample / SpecimenNumber
0.91 1.52
Bottom(m)
PercentPassing
#40 Sieve(%)
Sym.
ND
LIQUID LIMIT, PLASTIC LIMIT ANDPLASTICITY INDEX OF SOILS
Depth Interval (m):
LiquidLimit
PlasticLimit
PlasticityIndex
NaturalWater Content
(%)
LiquidityIndex
NP - NON-PLASTIC RESULT ND - NOT DETERMINED
0.91 to 1.52
AH19-07 30.041 30 0.0 11.0
PLASTICITY CHART
Pla
stic
ity
Ind
ex
Liquid Limit
Depth(m)
SampleLocation
RG/FF 11/28/2019 SJ
Note: The test data given herein pertain to the sample provided only. This report constitutes a testing service only.
SA2
ASTM D 4318
Nat
iona
l IM
Ser
ver:
GIN
T_G
AL_
NA
TIO
NA
LIM
Uni
que
Pro
ject
ID: O
utpu
t For
m:_
LAB
AT
TE
RB
ER
G C
AS
AG
RA
ND
E (
SIN
GLE
) 20
18 S
John
9/1
2/19
ID: AH19-07
Lab Schedule No.:
Sample No.: SA2
N/A
Preparation Method:Test Method: A-Multi Point
Other Remarks:
Air Dried
19115216 Phase: 4000 Task: 4020
Project:
Location:
Highway 95/93 Improvements
Client: Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure
Project No.:
DateTech Checked Date
300 - 3811 North Fraser Way, Burnaby, BC V5J 5J2 CANADATel: +1 (604) 412 6899 Fax: +1 (604) 412 6816 www.golder.com
Golder Associates Ltd.
SILT (ML)SILTY CLAY-CLAYEY SILT (CL-ML) CLAYEY SILT (ML)
ORGANIC SILT (OL)
A-Line
CLAYEY SILT (MH)ORGANIC SILT (OH)
CLAY(CH)
SILTY CLAY(CI)
SILTY CLAY(CL)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
12/9/2019
Sample / SpecimenNumber
6.10 6.71
Bottom(m)
PercentPassing
#40 Sieve(%)
Sym.
ND
LIQUID LIMIT, PLASTIC LIMIT ANDPLASTICITY INDEX OF SOILS
Depth Interval (m):
LiquidLimit
PlasticLimit
PlasticityIndex
NaturalWater Content
(%)
LiquidityIndex
NP - NON-PLASTIC RESULT ND - NOT DETERMINED
6.10 to 6.71
AH19-13 27.027 21 1.0 6.0
PLASTICITY CHART
Pla
stic
ity
Ind
ex
Liquid Limit
Depth(m)
SampleLocation
BM 12/2/2019 SJ
Note: The test data given herein pertain to the sample provided only. This report constitutes a testing service only.
SA7
ASTM D 4318
Nat
iona
l IM
Ser
ver:
GIN
T_G
AL_
NA
TIO
NA
LIM
Uni
que
Pro
ject
ID: O
utpu
t For
m:_
LAB
AT
TE
RB
ER
G C
AS
AG
RA
ND
E (
SIN
GLE
) 20
18 S
John
9/1
2/19
ID: AH19-13
Lab Schedule No.:
Sample No.: SA7
N/A
Preparation Method:Test Method: A-Multi Point
Other Remarks:
Wet
19115216 Phase: 4000 Task: 4020
Project:
Location:
Highway 95/93 Improvements
Client: Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure
Project No.:
DateTech Checked Date
300 - 3811 North Fraser Way, Burnaby, BC V5J 5J2 CANADATel: +1 (604) 412 6899 Fax: +1 (604) 412 6816 www.golder.com
Golder Associates Ltd.
SILT (ML)SILTY CLAY-CLAYEY SILT (CL-ML) CLAYEY SILT (ML)
ORGANIC SILT (OL)
A-Line
CLAYEY SILT (MH)ORGANIC SILT (OH)
CLAY(CH)
SILTY CLAY(CI)
SILTY CLAY(CL)
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.00010.0010.010.1110100
40201 1/2 4HydrometerU.S. Sieve Size (meshes / inch)
Coarse
GRAVEL
200100603/81224 USCS Particle Size Scale
SJ
4.57 to 5.18
FF/BM 11/27/2019 12/9/2019
Size of Opening (inches)103/436
Per
cen
t F
iner
by
Mas
s
SAND
Fine MediumCoarseBOULDER FINES (Silt, Clay)
Fine
Particle Size (mm)
COBBLE
(USS)
SUMMARY OF PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION
Depth Interval (m):
(mm)
PercentPassing
ParticleSizeSieve Size
Legend
(mm)
6"
3.5"
3"
2"
1 1/2"
1"
3/4"
1/2"
3/8"
#4 US MESH
#10 US MESH
#20 US MESH
#40 US MESH
#60 US MESH
#100 US MESH
#140 US MESH
#200 US MESH
152.4
88.9
76.2
50.8
38.1
25.4
19.1
12.7
9.5
4.75
2
0.85
0.425
0.25
0.15
0.106
0.075
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
99.8
99.6
99.4
99.2
99.0
98.9
Sample Location: AH19-01A
Sample No.: SA5
Lab Schedule No.:
ASTM D6913
National IM Server:GINT_GAL_NATIONALIM Unique Project ID:2415 Output Form:_LAB_PARTICLE SIZE (W/ GRADATIONS) 2018 SJohn 9/1/20
Tech Date Checked Date
Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure
Highway 95/93 Improvements
Client:
Project:
Location:
Project No.: 19115216 Phase: 4000 Task: 4020
300 - 3811 North Fraser Way, Burnaby, BC V5J 5J2 CANADATel: +1 (604) 412 6899 Fax: +1 (604) 412 6816 www.golder.com
Golder Associates Ltd.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.00010.0010.010.1110100
40201 1/2 4HydrometerU.S. Sieve Size (meshes / inch)
Coarse
GRAVEL
200100603/81224 USCS Particle Size Scale
SJ
1.52 to 2.13
FF/BM 11/27/2019 12/9/2019
Size of Opening (inches)103/436
Per
cen
t F
iner
by
Mas
s
SAND
Fine MediumCoarseBOULDER FINES (Silt, Clay)
Fine
Particle Size (mm)
COBBLE
(USS)
SUMMARY OF PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION
Depth Interval (m):
(mm)
PercentPassing
ParticleSizeSieve Size
Legend
(mm)
6"
3.5"
3"
2"
1 1/2"
1"
3/4"
1/2"
3/8"
#4 US MESH
#10 US MESH
#20 US MESH
#40 US MESH
#60 US MESH
#100 US MESH
#140 US MESH
#200 US MESH
152.4
88.9
76.2
50.8
38.1
25.4
19.1
12.7
9.5
4.75
2
0.85
0.425
0.25
0.15
0.106
0.075
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
70.0
70.0
70.0
66.6
64.1
62.5
61.0
58.8
55.3
52.0
49.8
47.8
Sample Location: AH19-04
Sample No.: SA3
Lab Schedule No.:
ASTM D6913
National IM Server:GINT_GAL_NATIONALIM Unique Project ID:2415 Output Form:_LAB_PARTICLE SIZE (W/ GRADATIONS) 2018 SJohn 9/12/19
Tech Date Checked Date
Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure
Highway 95/93 Improvements
Client:
Project:
Location:
Project No.: 19115216 Phase: 4000 Task: 4020
300 - 3811 North Fraser Way, Burnaby, BC V5J 5J2 CANADATel: +1 (604) 412 6899 Fax: +1 (604) 412 6816 www.golder.com
Golder Associates Ltd.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.00010.0010.010.1110100
40201 1/2 4HydrometerU.S. Sieve Size (meshes / inch)
Coarse
GRAVEL
200100603/81224 USCS Particle Size Scale
SJ
3.05 to 3.66
FF/BM 11/27/2019 12/9/2019
Size of Opening (inches)103/436
Per
cen
t F
iner
by
Mas
s
SAND
Fine MediumCoarseBOULDER FINES (Silt, Clay)
Fine
Particle Size (mm)
COBBLE
(USS)
SUMMARY OF PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION
Depth Interval (m):
(mm)
PercentPassing
ParticleSizeSieve Size
Legend
(mm)
6"
3.5"
3"
2"
1 1/2"
1"
3/4"
1/2"
3/8"
#4 US MESH
#10 US MESH
#20 US MESH
#40 US MESH
#60 US MESH
#100 US MESH
#140 US MESH
#200 US MESH
152.4
88.9
76.2
50.8
38.1
25.4
19.1
12.7
9.5
4.75
2
0.85
0.425
0.25
0.15
0.106
0.075
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
99.5
99.0
97.0
91.3
82.9
75.6
69.7
65.9
Sample Location: AH19-06
Sample No.: SA5
Lab Schedule No.:
ASTM D6913
National IM Server:GINT_GAL_NATIONALIM Unique Project ID:2415 Output Form:_LAB_PARTICLE SIZE (W/ GRADATIONS) 2018 SJohn 9/12/19
Tech Date Checked Date
Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure
Highway 95/93 Improvements
Client:
Project:
Location:
Project No.: 19115216 Phase: 4000 Task: 4020
300 - 3811 North Fraser Way, Burnaby, BC V5J 5J2 CANADATel: +1 (604) 412 6899 Fax: +1 (604) 412 6816 www.golder.com
Golder Associates Ltd.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.00010.0010.010.1110100
40201 1/2 4HydrometerU.S. Sieve Size (meshes / inch)
Coarse
GRAVEL
200100603/81224 USCS Particle Size Scale
SJ
4.57 to 5.18
FF/BM 11/27/2019 12/9/2019
Size of Opening (inches)103/436
Per
cen
t F
iner
by
Mas
s
SAND
Fine MediumCoarseBOULDER FINES (Silt, Clay)
Fine
Particle Size (mm)
COBBLE
(USS)
SUMMARY OF PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION
Depth Interval (m):
(mm)
PercentPassing
ParticleSizeSieve Size
Legend
(mm)
6"
3.5"
3"
2"
1 1/2"
1"
3/4"
1/2"
3/8"
#4 US MESH
#10 US MESH
#20 US MESH
#40 US MESH
#60 US MESH
#100 US MESH
#140 US MESH
#200 US MESH
152.4
88.9
76.2
50.8
38.1
25.4
19.1
12.7
9.5
4.75
2
0.85
0.425
0.25
0.15
0.106
0.075
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
96.7
87.1
76.8
69.9
51.6
34.5
23.7
16.9
12.9
10.2
8.9
8.0
Sample Location: AH19-06
Sample No.: SA7
Lab Schedule No.:
ASTM D6913
National IM Server:GINT_GAL_NATIONALIM Unique Project ID:2415 Output Form:_LAB_PARTICLE SIZE (W/ GRADATIONS) 2018 SJohn 9/12/19
Tech Date Checked Date
Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure
Highway 95/93 Improvements
Client:
Project:
Location:
Project No.: 19115216 Phase: 4000 Task: 4020
300 - 3811 North Fraser Way, Burnaby, BC V5J 5J2 CANADATel: +1 (604) 412 6899 Fax: +1 (604) 412 6816 www.golder.com
Golder Associates Ltd.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.00010.0010.010.1110100
40201 1/2 4HydrometerU.S. Sieve Size (meshes / inch)
Coarse
GRAVEL
200100603/81224 USCS Particle Size Scale
SJ
0.91 to 1.52
FF/BM 11/27/2019 12/9/2019
Size of Opening (inches)103/436
Per
cen
t F
iner
by
Mas
s
SAND
Fine MediumCoarseBOULDER FINES (Silt, Clay)
Fine
Particle Size (mm)
COBBLE
(USS)
SUMMARY OF PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION
Depth Interval (m):
(mm)
PercentPassing
ParticleSizeSieve Size
Legend
(mm)
6"
3.5"
3"
2"
1 1/2"
1"
3/4"
1/2"
3/8"
#4 US MESH
#10 US MESH
#20 US MESH
#40 US MESH
#60 US MESH
#100 US MESH
#140 US MESH
#200 US MESH
152.4
88.9
76.2
50.8
38.1
25.4
19.1
12.7
9.5
4.75
2
0.85
0.425
0.25
0.15
0.106
0.075
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
90.8
83.6
76.2
69.9
56.2
45.7
36.2
25.1
16.4
12.0
10.4
9.5
Sample Location: AH19-08
Sample No.: SA2
Lab Schedule No.:
ASTM D6913
National IM Server:GINT_GAL_NATIONALIM Unique Project ID:2415 Output Form:_LAB_PARTICLE SIZE (W/ GRADATIONS) 2018 SJohn 9/12/19
Tech Date Checked Date
Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure
Highway 95/93 Improvements
Client:
Project:
Location:
Project No.: 19115216 Phase: 4000 Task: 4020
300 - 3811 North Fraser Way, Burnaby, BC V5J 5J2 CANADATel: +1 (604) 412 6899 Fax: +1 (604) 412 6816 www.golder.com
Golder Associates Ltd.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.00010.0010.010.1110100
40201 1/2 4HydrometerU.S. Sieve Size (meshes / inch)
Coarse
GRAVEL
200100603/81224 USCS Particle Size Scale
SJ
1.52 to 2.13
FF/BM 11/27/2019 12/9/2019
Size of Opening (inches)103/436
Per
cen
t F
iner
by
Mas
s
SAND
Fine MediumCoarseBOULDER FINES (Silt, Clay)
Fine
Particle Size (mm)
COBBLE
(USS)
SUMMARY OF PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION
Depth Interval (m):
(mm)
PercentPassing
ParticleSizeSieve Size
Legend
(mm)
6"
3.5"
3"
2"
1 1/2"
1"
3/4"
1/2"
3/8"
#4 US MESH
#10 US MESH
#20 US MESH
#40 US MESH
#60 US MESH
#100 US MESH
#140 US MESH
#200 US MESH
152.4
88.9
76.2
50.8
38.1
25.4
19.1
12.7
9.5
4.75
2
0.85
0.425
0.25
0.15
0.106
0.075
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
96.5
93.1
85.1
78.4
62.0
46.3
36.0
27.6
20.4
15.7
13.5
12.0
Sample Location: AH19-09
Sample No.: SA3
Lab Schedule No.:
ASTM D6913
National IM Server:GINT_GAL_NATIONALIM Unique Project ID:2415 Output Form:_LAB_PARTICLE SIZE (W/ GRADATIONS) 2018 SJohn 9/12/19
Tech Date Checked Date
Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure
Highway 95/93 Improvements
Client:
Project:
Location:
Project No.: 19115216 Phase: 4000 Task: 4020
300 - 3811 North Fraser Way, Burnaby, BC V5J 5J2 CANADATel: +1 (604) 412 6899 Fax: +1 (604) 412 6816 www.golder.com
Golder Associates Ltd.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.00010.0010.010.1110100
40201 1/2 4HydrometerU.S. Sieve Size (meshes / inch)
Coarse
GRAVEL
200100603/81224 USCS Particle Size Scale
SJ
0.08 to 0.30
FF/BM 11/27/2019 12/9/2019
Size of Opening (inches)103/436
Per
cen
t F
iner
by
Mas
s
SAND
Fine MediumCoarseBOULDER FINES (Silt, Clay)
Fine
Particle Size (mm)
COBBLE
(USS)
SUMMARY OF PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION
Depth Interval (m):
(mm)
PercentPassing
ParticleSizeSieve Size
Legend
(mm)
6"
3.5"
3"
2"
1 1/2"
1"
3/4"
1/2"
3/8"
#4 US MESH
#10 US MESH
#20 US MESH
#40 US MESH
#60 US MESH
#100 US MESH
#140 US MESH
#200 US MESH
152.4
88.9
76.2
50.8
38.1
25.4
19.1
12.7
9.5
4.75
2
0.85
0.425
0.25
0.15
0.106
0.075
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
92.9
71.7
59.7
40.7
27.0
18.4
12.5
7.9
5.0
4.0
3.4
Sample Location: AH19-12
Sample No.: SA1
Lab Schedule No.:
ASTM D6913
National IM Server:GINT_GAL_NATIONALIM Unique Project ID:2415 Output Form:_LAB_PARTICLE SIZE (W/ GRADATIONS) 2018 SJohn 9/12/19
Tech Date Checked Date
Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure
Highway 95/93 Improvements
Client:
Project:
Location:
Project No.: 19115216 Phase: 4000 Task: 4020
300 - 3811 North Fraser Way, Burnaby, BC V5J 5J2 CANADATel: +1 (604) 412 6899 Fax: +1 (604) 412 6816 www.golder.com
Golder Associates Ltd.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
0.00010.0010.010.1110100
40201 1/2 4HydrometerU.S. Sieve Size (meshes / inch)
Coarse
GRAVEL
200100603/81224 USCS Particle Size Scale
SJ
1.52 to 2.13
FF/BM 11/27/2019 12/9/2019
Size of Opening (inches)103/436
Per
cen
t F
iner
by
Mas
s
SAND
Fine MediumCoarseBOULDER FINES (Silt, Clay)
Fine
Particle Size (mm)
COBBLE
(USS)
SUMMARY OF PARTICLE SIZE DISTRIBUTION
Depth Interval (m):
(mm)
PercentPassing
ParticleSizeSieve Size
Legend
(mm)
6"
3.5"
3"
2"
1 1/2"
1"
3/4"
1/2"
3/8"
#4 US MESH
#10 US MESH
#20 US MESH
#40 US MESH
#60 US MESH
#100 US MESH
#140 US MESH
#200 US MESH
152.4
88.9
76.2
50.8
38.1
25.4
19.1
12.7
9.5
4.75
2
0.85
0.425
0.25
0.15
0.106
0.075
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
96.3
92.9
82.3
76.6
56.5
41.1
31.8
23.5
16.3
12.1
10.3
9.1
Sample Location: AH19-12
Sample No.: SA3
Lab Schedule No.:
ASTM D6913
National IM Server:GINT_GAL_NATIONALIM Unique Project ID:2415 Output Form:_LAB_PARTICLE SIZE (W/ GRADATIONS) 2018 SJohn 9/12/19
Tech Date Checked Date
Ministry of Transportation and Infrastructure
Highway 95/93 Improvements
Client:
Project:
Location:
Project No.: 19115216 Phase: 4000 Task: 4020
300 - 3811 North Fraser Way, Burnaby, BC V5J 5J2 CANADATel: +1 (604) 412 6899 Fax: +1 (604) 412 6816 www.golder.com
Golder Associates Ltd.
Miniature Vane Shear Test for SaturatedFine-Grained Clayey Soils
Project No.:
Project: Instrument ID: GEO839
Location: Lab ID No:
Client:
Pilcon Geotechnics Hand Shear Vane
* The test data given herein pertain to the sample provided only. This report constitutes a testing service only. Interpretation of the data can be provided upon request.
Other InformationVANE TYPE
PEAK REMOULDED
SAMPLE DEPTH (m) TEST DEPTH Torque reading [lbf/ft²]
Vane shear strength [kPa]
1.52 - 2.13
Torque reading [lbf/ft²]
Vane shear strength [kPa]
Test @ 1.57 m Large 1250.0 59.93B 300.0 14.4 26.8% WC
Golder Associates Ltd.590 McKay Ave, Suite 300, Kelowna, BC V1Y 5A8
Tel: 250-860-8424 www.golder.com
ASTM D4648-D4648M
BOREHOLE
Jason Stotz November 29, 2019 Gavin Black January 9, 2020
TESTED BY DATE CHECKED BY DATE
19115216 - 4000 - 4020 Vane Apparatus:
Highway 95/93 Improvements
Radium, BC K19-123
MOTi
AH19-01B
golder.com
2 March 2020 19115216-007-R-Rev0
APPENDIX C
2015 NBCC Seismic Hazard
Calculation Reports
2015 National Building Code Seismic Hazard CalculationINFORMATION: Eastern Canada English (613) 995-5548 français (613) 995-0600 Facsimile (613) 992-8836
Western Canada English (250) 363-6500 Facsimile (250) 363-6565
Site: 50.704N 116.130W User File Reference: Edgewater 2020-01-23 18:32 UT
Probability of exceedance per annum 0.000404 0.001 0.0021 0.01
Probability of exceedance in 50 years 2 % 5 % 10 % 40 %
Sa (0.05) 0.150 0.085 0.050 0.012
Sa (0.1) 0.225 0.128 0.075 0.018
Sa (0.2) 0.262 0.153 0.093 0.025
Sa (0.3) 0.233 0.140 0.087 0.026
Sa (0.5) 0.173 0.103 0.065 0.021
Sa (1.0) 0.095 0.059 0.039 0.014
Sa (2.0) 0.046 0.030 0.021 0.007
Sa (5.0) 0.017 0.011 0.007 0.002
Sa (10.0) 0.006 0.004 0.003 0.001
PGA (g) 0.120 0.069 0.041 0.010
PGV (m/s) 0.097 0.060 0.040 0.014
Notes: Spectral (Sa(T), where T is the period in seconds) and peak ground acceleration (PGA) values aregiven in units of g (9.81 m/s2). Peak ground velocity is given in m/s. Values are for "firm ground"(NBCC2015 Site Class C, average shear wave velocity 450 m/s). NBCC2015 and CSAS6-14 values arehighlighted in yellow. Three additional periods are provided - their use is discussed in the NBCC2015Commentary. Only 2 significant figures are to be used. These values have been interpolated from a10-km-spaced grid of points. Depending on the gradient of the nearby points, values at thislocation calculated directly from the hazard program may vary. More than 95 percent ofinterpolated values are within 2 percent of the directly calculated values.
References
National Building Code of Canada 2015 NRCC no. 56190; Appendix C: Table C-3, Seismic DesignData for Selected Locations in Canada
Structural Commentaries (User's Guide - NBC 2015: Part 4 of Division B)Commentary J: Design for Seismic Effects
Geological Survey of Canada Open File 7893 Fifth Generation Seismic Hazard Model for Canada: Gridvalues of mean hazard to be used with the 2015 National Building Code of Canada
See the websites www.EarthquakesCanada.ca and www.nationalcodes.ca for more information
2015 National Building Code Seismic Hazard CalculationINFORMATION: Eastern Canada English (613) 995-5548 français (613) 995-0600 Facsimile (613) 992-8836
Western Canada English (250) 363-6500 Facsimile (250) 363-6565
Site: 50.985N 116.460W User File Reference: Harrogate, BC 2020-01-14 22:57 UT
Probability of exceedance per annum 0.000404 0.001 0.0021 0.01
Probability of exceedance in 50 years 2 % 5 % 10 % 40 %
Sa (0.05) 0.150 0.085 0.050 0.012
Sa (0.1) 0.226 0.129 0.076 0.018
Sa (0.2) 0.264 0.154 0.094 0.025
Sa (0.3) 0.235 0.141 0.088 0.026
Sa (0.5) 0.174 0.104 0.065 0.021
Sa (1.0) 0.095 0.058 0.038 0.013
Sa (2.0) 0.046 0.030 0.020 0.007
Sa (5.0) 0.017 0.011 0.007 0.002
Sa (10.0) 0.006 0.004 0.003 0.001
PGA (g) 0.121 0.069 0.041 0.010
PGV (m/s) 0.097 0.060 0.039 0.014
Notes: Spectral (Sa(T), where T is the period in seconds) and peak ground acceleration (PGA) values aregiven in units of g (9.81 m/s2). Peak ground velocity is given in m/s. Values are for "firm ground"(NBCC2015 Site Class C, average shear wave velocity 450 m/s). NBCC2015 and CSAS6-14 values arehighlighted in yellow. Three additional periods are provided - their use is discussed in the NBCC2015Commentary. Only 2 significant figures are to be used. These values have been interpolated from a10-km-spaced grid of points. Depending on the gradient of the nearby points, values at thislocation calculated directly from the hazard program may vary. More than 95 percent ofinterpolated values are within 2 percent of the directly calculated values.
References
National Building Code of Canada 2015 NRCC no. 56190; Appendix C: Table C-3, Seismic DesignData for Selected Locations in Canada
Structural Commentaries (User's Guide - NBC 2015: Part 4 of Division B)Commentary J: Design for Seismic Effects
Geological Survey of Canada Open File 7893 Fifth Generation Seismic Hazard Model for Canada: Gridvalues of mean hazard to be used with the 2015 National Building Code of Canada
See the websites www.EarthquakesCanada.ca and www.nationalcodes.ca for more information
2 March 2020 19115216-007-R-Rev0
APPENDIX D
Graphical Results of Slope Stability
Analyses
PROJECT No. TASK Rev FIGURE
19115216 4000/4030 0
MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATION AND
INFRASTRUCTURE BC
HIGHWAY 95 IMPROVEMENTS
RADIUM HOT SPRINGS, BC
CLIENT
CONSULTANT
PROJECT
TITLEYYYY-MM-DD
PREPARED
DESIGN
REVIEW
APPROVED
G.B.
G.B.
2019-12-19
C.H.
G.R. D1-1
Slope Stability Analysis – Edgewater
South Embankment Section AA’ 2.0H:1V
PROJECT No. TASK Rev FIGURE
19115216 4000/4030 0
MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATION AND
INFRASTRUCTURE BC
HIGHWAY 95 IMPROVEMENTS
RADIUM HOT SPRINGS, BC
CLIENT
CONSULTANT
PROJECT
TITLEYYYY-MM-DD
PREPARED
DESIGN
REVIEW
APPROVED
G.B.
G.B.
2019-12-19
C.H.
G.R. D1-2
Slope Stability Analysis – Edgewater
South Embankment Section AA’ 2.25H:1V
PROJECT No. TASK Rev FIGURE
19115216 4000/4030 0
MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATION AND
INFRASTRUCTURE BC
HIGHWAY 95 IMPROVEMENTS
RADIUM HOT SPRINGS, BC
CLIENT
CONSULTANT
PROJECT
TITLEYYYY-MM-DD
PREPARED
DESIGN
REVIEW
APPROVED
G.B.
G.B.
2019-12-19
C.H.
G.R. D2-1
Slope Stability Analysis – Edgewater
North Embankment Section BB’ 2.0H:1V
PROJECT No. TASK Rev FIGURE
19115216 4000/4030 0
MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATION AND
INFRASTRUCTURE BC
HIGHWAY 95 IMPROVEMENTS
RADIUM HOT SPRINGS, BC
CLIENT
CONSULTANT
PROJECT
TITLEYYYY-MM-DD
PREPARED
DESIGN
REVIEW
APPROVED
G.B.
G.B.
C.H.
2019-12-19
G.R. D3-1
Slope Stability Analysis – Harrogate Cut
Slope Section CC’ 1.5H:1V - Static
PROJECT No. TASK Rev FIGURE
19115216 4000/4030 0
MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATION AND
INFRASTRUCTURE BC
HIGHWAY 95 IMPROVEMENTS
RADIUM HOT SPRINGS, BC
CLIENT
CONSULTANT
PROJECT
TITLEYYYY-MM-DD
PREPARED
DESIGN
REVIEW
APPROVED
G.B.
G.B.
C.H.
2019-12-19
G.R. D3-2
Slope Stability Analysis – Harrogate Cut
Slope Section CC’ 1.5H:1V – Pseudo-
Static
PROJECT No. TASK Rev FIGURE
19115216 4000/4030 0
MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATION AND
INFRASTRUCTURE BC
HIGHWAY 95 IMPROVEMENTS
RADIUM HOT SPRINGS, BC
CLIENT
CONSULTANT
PROJECT
TITLEYYYY-MM-DD
PREPARED
DESIGN
REVIEW
APPROVED
G.B.
G.B.
C.H.
2019-12-19
G.R. D3-3
Slope Stability Analysis – Harrogate Cut
Slope Section CC’ 1.75H:1V - Static
PROJECT No. TASK Rev FIGURE
19115216 4000/4030 0
MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATION AND
INFRASTRUCTURE BC
HIGHWAY 95 IMPROVEMENTS
RADIUM HOT SPRINGS, BC
CLIENT
CONSULTANT
PROJECT
TITLEYYYY-MM-DD
PREPARED
DESIGN
REVIEW
APPROVED
G.B.
G.B.
C.H.
2019-12-19
G.R. D3-4
Slope Stability Analysis – Harrogate Cut
Slope Section CC’ 1.75H:1V – Pseudo-
Static
PROJECT No. TASK Rev FIGURE
19115216 4000/4030 0
MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATION AND
INFRASTRUCTURE BC
HIGHWAY 95 IMPROVEMENTS
RADIUM HOT SPRINGS, BC
CLIENT
CONSULTANT
PROJECT
TITLEYYYY-MM-DD
PREPARED
DESIGN
REVIEW
APPROVED
G.B.
G.B.
C.H.
2019-12-19
G.R. D3-5
Slope Stability Analysis – Harrogate Cut
Slope Section CC’ 2.0H:1V - Static
PROJECT No. TASK Rev FIGURE
19115216 4000/4030 0
MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATION AND
INFRASTRUCTURE BC
HIGHWAY 95 IMPROVEMENTS
RADIUM HOT SPRINGS, BC
CLIENT
CONSULTANT
PROJECT
TITLEYYYY-MM-DD
PREPARED
DESIGN
REVIEW
APPROVED
G.B.
G.B.
C.H.
2019-12-19
G.R. D3-6
Slope Stability Analysis – Harrogate Cut
Slope Section CC’ 2.0H:1V – Pseudo-
Static
PROJECT No. TASK Rev FIGURE
19115216 4000/4030 0
MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATION AND
INFRASTRUCTURE BC
HIGHWAY 95 IMPROVEMENTS
RADIUM HOT SPRINGS, BC
CLIENT
CONSULTANT
PROJECT
TITLEYYYY-MM-DD
PREPARED
DESIGN
REVIEW
APPROVED
G.B.
G.B.
C.H.
2019-12-19
G.R. D3-7
Slope Stability Analysis – Harrogate Cut
Slope Section DD’ 1.5H:1V - Static
PROJECT No. TASK Rev FIGURE
19115216 4000/4030 0
MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATION AND
INFRASTRUCTURE BC
HIGHWAY 95 IMPROVEMENTS
RADIUM HOT SPRINGS, BC
CLIENT
CONSULTANT
PROJECT
TITLEYYYY-MM-DD
PREPARED
DESIGN
REVIEW
APPROVED
G.B.
G.B.
C.H.
2019-12-19
G.R. D3-8
Slope Stability Analysis – Harrogate Cut
Slope Section DD’ 1.5H:1V – Pseudo-
Static
PROJECT No. TASK Rev FIGURE
19115216 4000/4030 0
MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATION AND
INFRASTRUCTURE BC
HIGHWAY 95 IMPROVEMENTS
RADIUM HOT SPRINGS, BC
CLIENT
CONSULTANT
PROJECT
TITLEYYYY-MM-DD
PREPARED
DESIGN
REVIEW
APPROVED
G.B.
G.B.
C.H.
2019-12-19
G.R. D3-9
Slope Stability Analysis – Harrogate Cut
Slope Section DD’ 1.75H:1V - Static
PROJECT No. TASK Rev FIGURE
19115216 4000/4030 0
MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATION AND
INFRASTRUCTURE BC
HIGHWAY 95 IMPROVEMENTS
RADIUM HOT SPRINGS, BC
CLIENT
CONSULTANT
PROJECT
TITLEYYYY-MM-DD
PREPARED
DESIGN
REVIEW
APPROVED
G.B.
G.B.
C.H.
2019-12-19
G.R. D3-10
Slope Stability Analysis – Harrogate Cut
Slope Section DD’ 1.75H:1V – Pseudo-
Static
PROJECT No. TASK Rev FIGURE
19115216 4000/4030 0
MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATION AND
INFRASTRUCTURE BC
HIGHWAY 95 IMPROVEMENTS
RADIUM HOT SPRINGS, BC
CLIENT
CONSULTANT
PROJECT
TITLEYYYY-MM-DD
PREPARED
DESIGN
REVIEW
APPROVED
G.B.
G.B.
C.H.
2019-12-19
G.R. D3-11
Slope Stability Analysis – Harrogate Cut
Slope Section DD’ 2.0H:1V - Static
PROJECT No. TASK Rev FIGURE
19115216 4000/4030 0
MINISTRY OF TRANSPORTATION AND
INFRASTRUCTURE BC
HIGHWAY 95 IMPROVEMENTS
RADIUM HOT SPRINGS, BC
CLIENT
CONSULTANT
PROJECT
TITLEYYYY-MM-DD
PREPARED
DESIGN
REVIEW
APPROVED
G.B.
G.B.
C.H.
2019-12-19
G.R. D3-12
Slope Stability Analysis – Harrogate Cut
Slope Section DD’ 2.0H:1V – Pseudo-
Static
golder.com